Global Warming worse than expected

[Mathematician]

Climate change worse than predicted | The Courier-Mail

REPORT by Australian scientists has warned that the world is warming faster than predicted by the United Nations' top climate change body. The report, prepared by Dr Graeme Pearman, former head of the CSIRO's atmospheric research unit, found temperatures and greenhouse pollution were rising faster than forecast by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

The report, prepared for the Climate Institute, noted that the IPCC's recent Fourth Assessment Report used material published up to mid-2006, but many important new observations had been published since.

 

[yossarian22]

Oh good god.
Read before blindly posting compelling new "evidence"
"The most recent data show that present-day carbon dioxide concentration is now over 382 ppm,"
Well knock me down with a feather.
Its shocking how CO2 concentrations have increased. Its not like any large countries are developing.

"These suggest that the IPCC assessment is underestimating the risks of adverse impacts due to increased warming during this century and that impacts previously considered to be at the upper end of likelihood are now more probable," the report reads.
"Greenhouse emissions are rising faster than the worst-case IPCC scenarios."
Great,and this shows that temperatures are rising faster how?
Oh but wait! The news group came to this conclusion from those quotes.
"The report found if current trends continue the world's temperature will rise approximately three degrees celsius by the end of this century, relative to pre-industrial temperatures - well above what are considered dangerous levels."
And the reason for assuming temperature will follow current trends? Hell, what is the current trend? I don't want to see some vague thing like "Temperatures are rising". I want at least a rough estimate. We cannot predict the past climate. Only one model can predict the cooling in the 70s. And guess what? That model does not factor CO2 into the equation

We'd better ignore other pressing environmental issues such as the Montreal Protocol's failure to stop the hole in the ozone layer and throw trillions of dollars into stopping something which, assuming it even existed, would likely be beneficial to the world.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Oh good god.
Read before blindly posting compelling new "evidence"
"The most recent data show that present-day carbon dioxide concentration is now over 382 ppm,"
Well knock me down with a feather.
Its shocking how CO2 concentrations have increased. Its not like any large countries are developing.

"These suggest that the IPCC assessment is underestimating the risks of adverse impacts due to increased warming during this century and that impacts previously considered to be at the upper end of likelihood are now more probable," the report reads.
"Greenhouse emissions are rising faster than the worst-case IPCC scenarios."
Great,and this shows that temperatures are rising faster how?
Oh but wait! The news group came to this conclusion from those quotes.
"The report found if current trends continue the world's temperature will rise approximately three degrees celsius by the end of this century, relative to pre-industrial temperatures - well above what are considered dangerous levels."
And the reason for assuming temperature will follow current trends? Hell, what is the current trend? I don't want to see some vague thing like "Temperatures are rising". I want at least a rough estimate. We cannot predict the past climate. Only one model can predict the cooling in the 70s. And guess what? That model does not factor CO2 into the equation

We'd better ignore other pressing environmental issues such as the Montreal Protocol's failure to stop the hole in the ozone layer and throw trillions of dollars into stopping something which, assuming it even existed, would likely be beneficial to the world.

I take it you are a global warming denier
What qualifications do you need to Join that group?

 

[doppelganger]

I take it you are a global warming denier
What qualifications do you need to Join that group?

A keyboard, an internet connection, a resolute resolve to stick to your conclusion whatever the evidence and a special disdain for cassandras.

 

[Reverend Rick]

I take it you are a global warming denier
What qualifications do you need to Join that group?

The same qualifications you need to try and predict the weather for Saturday's golf game.

Terry, this global warming thing has become a religion. The reason I say this is it is a leap of faith more than a science. I was watching a show that had scientists core drilling ice. The earth's temperature has changed many times before there ever were man made Co2 emmisions.

I guess I am a Global Warming Moderate. I think the solution to the problem is a great idea. I just don't buy into the conclusion there is a problem in the first place.

I plant trees, recycle, have an energy efficient home with geothermal heat and solar water heaters. I have planted trees all my life since a small boy who planted an acorn that has now produced a 60 foot oak tree. I carried water to the small tree every day when I was barely strong enough to lift the water buckets.

I have recycled since the 1970's religiously. I would love to see less cars on the road and more bicycles, mopeds and golf carts instead. I think it is stupid to travel long distances for business (but I still do).

So all the solutions presented for global warming, I can get on board with.

I just don't drink the Kool-aid that believes that we can predict the weather. We were suppose to have a bad year for hurricanes and the last two years have been mild. When Katrina hit New Orleans, people said, "see, there's your proof".

That's bull! I have been looking for a city below sea level to be destroyed for 30 years. It was just a matter of time before New Orleans would get flooded. It was not a matter of "IF", it was a matter of,"WHEN".

What are the qualifications to have an opinion of global warming? When you realize that we are on this planet but a brief time and we are along for the ride and do not have the ability to change squat.

If I am wrong about this, impress me with a reliable weather forecast or even a correct prediction of rain, drought, or storms for a year. Then I may be able to take a sip of the global warming religious kool-aid.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

The same qualifications you need to try and predict the weather for Saturday's golf game.

Terry, this global warming thing has become a religion. The reason I say this is it is a leap of faith more than a science. I was watching a show that had scientists core drilling ice. The earth's temperature has changed many times before there ever were man made Co2 emmisions.

I guess I am a Global Warming Moderate. I think the solution to the problem is a great idea. I just don't buy into the conclusion there is a problem in the first place.

I plant trees, recycle, have an energy efficient home with geothermal heat and solar water heaters. I have planted trees all my life since a small boy who planted an acorn that has now produced a 60 foot oak tree. I carried water to the small tree every day when I was barely strong enough to lift the water buckets.

I have recycled since the 1970's religiously. I would love to see less cars on the road and more bicycles, mopeds and golf carts instead. I think it is stupid to travel long distances for business (but I still do).

So all the solutions presented for global warming, I can get on board with.

I just don't drink the Kool-aid that believes that we can predict the weather. We were suppose to have a bad year for hurricanes and the last two years have been mild. When Katrina hit New Orleans, people said, "see, there's your proof".

That's bull! I have been looking for a city below sea level to be destroyed for 30 years. It was just a matter of time before New Orleans would get flooded. It was not a matter of "IF", it was a matter of,"WHEN".

What are the qualifications to have an opinion of global warming? When you realize that we are on this planet but a brief time and we are along for the ride and do not have the ability to change squat.

If I am wrong about this, impress me with a reliable weather forecast or even a correct prediction of rain, drought, or storms for a year. Then I may be able to take a sip of the global warming religious kool-aid.

There are two ways to look at global warming...neither of them nice...
Firstly that the temperature of the world naturally changes from hot to cold in a sort of cycle... and we are going through a period of rising temperature.
The other is the Cycles are caused By events... either as in this case the felling and burning of our natural lung the rainforests; aggravated by high carbon and other chemical emissions that cause the green house effect and also the removal of much of the ozone layer. Other events in prehistory caused the demise of the dinosaurs and precipitated at least one of the Ice ages.

In either scenario the result is massive climate change, that will damage and alter the ecosystem and decimate many life forms including man.

we can do nothing about the first scenario but hopefully we can still mitigate the effects of the second, at least as it relates to the damage caused by man.

There will come a time with either, when we will have to accept that Mankind can not survive either in it's present numbers nor with its present life style.
The sooner we accept this and take action, the less will be the total damage.

Your Question about weather forecasts is actually not relevant. But raises a separate interesting off topic issue. Forecasters know from their mathematical research that they will never be able to greatly exceed their present capability, even with the most powerful computers, as this would need the ability to forecast the results of the effects of chaos theory. The UK met office have stopped research on long range forecasting for this reason, and no longer issue any long range forecasts.

 

[Reverend Rick]

I wonder how many atheists believe in man made global warming?

I wonder how many global warming blind followers are attempting to do anything about the problem?

What needs to happen is, people need to start living in a community that is self supplying. This world economy is the problem. We ship goods from China that could be made locally, we drive by people each day on the highway heading to each others location to perform similar services.

Air travel should be something you do once every several years and not a common occurrence.

What is wrong with taking a local vacation?

I would be willing to bet most of the koolaid drinkers have not even changed their air filter on their furnace this year yet!

 

[PureX]

I take it you are a global warming denier
What qualifications do you need to Join that group?

All you need is the ability to believe that you can p*ss and sh*t in your own living room in perpetuity, and somehow, magically, it will NEVER stink, ruin the floors, or breed disease.

 

[Reverend Rick]

All you need is the ability to believe that you can p*ss and sh*t in your own living room in perpetuity, and somehow, magically, it will NEVER stink, ruin the floors, or breed disease.

My cows are doing just that and they contribute to global warming more than I do.

 

[Willamena]

The same qualifications you need to try and predict the weather for Saturday's golf game.

Terry, this global warming thing has become a religion. The reason I say this is it is a leap of faith more than a science. I was watching a show that had scientists core drilling ice. The earth's temperature has changed many times before there ever were man made Co2 emmisions.

I guess I am a Global Warming Moderate. I think the solution to the problem is a great idea. I just don't buy into the conclusion there is a problem in the first place.

The "problem" isn't the earth warming --you know that, don't you? Saying such a thing suggests you don't even know what the issue is about.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

My cows are doing just that and they contribute to global warming more than I do.

Only in direct carbon emissions.... Though for our size we do quite well at emitting Greenhouse gas. Indirectly we do far more damage than your cows and we each contribute to our share in every thing we purchase and use and trash.
In fact there would be fewer cows if it were not for man.

 

[Reverend Rick]

In fact there would be fewer cows if it were not for man.

Are you sure about that? Man eats alot of beef. Think about the buffalo.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Are you sure about that? Man eats alot of beef. Think about the buffalo.

We never ate that many Buffalo in proportion to those we killed ... they just took the skins....beside which they are a different species.
I don't think killing all ruminants is a realistic way of saving on greenhouse gas.

We keep a lot of Cows because we eat a lot of Beef ... we don't keep them to look pretty.

 

[Reverend Rick]

We never ate that many Buffalo in proportion to those we killed ... they just took the skins....beside which they are a different species.
I don't think killing all ruminants is a realistic way of saving on greenhouse gas.

We keep a lot of Cows because we eat a lot of Beef ... we don't keep them to look pretty.

We have alot of pretty horses in Kentucky. I don't know if wild horses used to outnumber domestic ones now or not.

 

[sandandfoam]

A few interesting facts :-
It will take another 50 years for the earth to be as warm as it was when the Romans were here.

Only once in the last 100 million years has CO2 been as low in the atmosphere as it is at present.

We are technically still coming out of an ice age.

The polar ice caps have melted completely several times and the polar bears still survived.

Temperature and CO2 are linked but Temperature rises first and CO2 levels follow with a thirty year lag. Not the other way round .

The idea that its us using our cars and bikes that is heating up the earth... I think not
What's the cause of global warming? Solar activity probably.

Some brilliant spin doctor realised that, if you turn this scenario around and claim greenhouse gas is causing global warming, you have the perfect excuse to tax the public and they can't complain because it's all in the name of saving the planet.

 

[Reverend Rick]

I'm no climatologist, but I thought global warming had more to do with water vapor and no one has a grip on how much this changes.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

A few interesting facts :-
It will take another 50 years for the earth to be as warm as it was when the Romans were here.

Only once in the last 100 million years has CO2 been as low in the atmosphere as it is at present.

We are technically still coming out of an ice age.

The polar ice caps have melted completely several times and the polar bears still survived.

Temperature and CO2 are linked but Temperature rises first and CO2 levels follow with a thirty year lag. Not the other way round .

The idea that its us using our cars and bikes that is heating up the earth... I think not
What's the cause of global warming? Solar activity probably.

Some brilliant spin doctor realised that, if you turn this scenario around and claim greenhouse gas is causing global warming, you have the perfect excuse to tax the public and they can't complain because it's all in the name of saving the planet.

I am afraid it is you who has been caught by the miss-information of spin doctors.
tomorrow the UN will issue the latest report by international climatologists and according to the BBC this evening, it is grim reading

 

[yossarian22]

I am afraid it is you who has been caught by the miss-information of spin doctors.
tomorrow the UN will issue the latest report by international climatologists and according to the BBC this evening, it is grim reading

Hah. Of course. The infallible politically driven IPCC. Can't be biased at all can it? I mean, they only have had Mann review his own work and have a couple scientists resign in protest of preconceived findings

 

[yossarian22]

Some brilliant spin doctor realised that, if you turn this scenario around and claim greenhouse gas is causing global warming, you have the perfect excuse to tax the public and they can't complain because it's all in the name of saving the planet.

Great point

I am afraid it is you who has been caught by the miss-information of spin doctors.

Brilliant counterpoint.

All you need is the ability to believe that you can p*ss and sh*t in your own living room in perpetuity, and somehow, magically, it will NEVER stink, ruin the floors, or breed disease.

A keyboard, an internet connection, a resolute resolve to stick to your conclusion whatever the evidence and a special disdain for cassandras.

Ad hominem attacks eh?

Its odd how people assume that skeptics of global warming are ignorant and misinformed.
Its ironic how many supporters of global warming have no idea what the hell they are talking about. Don't believe this assertion? Go to an environmental rally and ask people about global warming. An alarmingly high number of them believe it merely because 1. They watched an Inconvenient Truth (quite a convincing film, until you realize there is no science behind it) or 2. They were told by person X about the problem CO2 has. Even the rally leaders have no idea what they are talking about. Of course environmental rallies rarely ever deal with the environment. Its mostly people screaming about the evils of corporate America under the guise of being an environmentalist.

I will leap on the global warming bandwagon again after seeing evidence which shows this
1. The rate of temperature rise increases by an appreciable amount
2. The warming will be bad enough to justify the spendings of trillions

 

[Mathematician]

My cows are doing just that and they contribute to global warming more than I do.

Guess we should stop excessively breeding them to feed our fat butts, then.