Global Warming- True or False?

[Gary88]

And this refuted what?

he used data from the 80s or early 90s linking solar activity to temperature change, the science in that paper has long since been over turned. the solar activity is one of their leading arguments yet he tried to back it up with outdated science.

I saw one guy who said he didnt mean what he said I saw a list of 2 or 3 others who claimed the same. And this refuted w exactly what point?

i could show you the Royal Societies website which has a thourough breakdown of the misconceptions (not specific to the doc but many are the same) only, i believe you only read islamic hate comic books so do i need waste my time?

http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/page.asp?i...FQhBMAodF0J_YA

also this quote is where my previous comment comes from

These orbital variations are well known from astronomical data and can be precisely predicted; the next ice age is expected in about 50,000 years

this is from a lecture at a cambridge college

[Rush Limbaugh]

he used data from the 80s or early 90s linking solar activity to temperature change, the science in that paper has long since been over turned. the solar activity is one of their leading arguments yet he tried to back it up with outdated science.

So your admitting it was right but that the science was old.

i could show you the Royal Societies website which has a thourough breakdown of the misconceptions (not specific to the doc but many are the same) only, i believe you only read islamic hate comic books so do i need waste my time?

I could show you lots that refute that. Wanna play? Its obvious you dont know me too well if thats what you believe.

These orbital variations are well known from astronomical data and can be precisely predicted; the next ice age is expected in about 50,000 years
this is from a lecture at a cambridge college

Well that makes it a fact Im sure


The ice age cometh

Next ice age is 15,000 years off

[Gary88]

So your admitting it was right but that the science was old.

no i'm saying his leading argument is based on out of date data that is untrue.

I could show you lots that refute that. Wanna play? Its obvious you dont know me too well if thats what you believe.

oh goodie, will it be 'antigreen' or perhaps the fundamentalists at 'jihad watch' have something to say on the matter...i like my sources respectable and unbiased if you dont mind.

Well that makes it a fact Im sure

what you mean the painstakingly carefully calculated milankovitch cycles that show how the earths tilt and rotation about the sun afect the amount of solar radiation we recieve on earth that directly correlates to solar based ice ages that are so precise it took 20 years to calculate? well i guess they could be off...

[Rush Limbaugh]

no i'm saying his leading argument is based on out of date data that is untrue.

Show me where the theory that solar activity doesnt cause global warming. Even the idea seems ludicrous to me.

.i like my sources respectable and unbiased if you dont mind.

To bad you cant find any.

what you mean the painstakingly carefully calculated milankovitch cycles that show how the earths tilt and rotation about the sun afect the amount of solar radiation we recieve on earth that directly correlates to solar based ice ages that are so precise it took 20 years to calculate? well i guess they could be off...

Give or take 40 or 50 thousand years.

[Gary88]

Show me where the theory that solar activity doesnt cause global warming. Even the idea seems ludicrous to me.

its wrong because solar activity rises and falls in cycles of (i'm pretty sure) 11 years however the trend goes up and down but the is no overall up or down trend meaning the long term temperature rises (of continually up for over 11 years) are not explained by this, the idea that solar output increases have caused the continual climb in worldwide temperature is an out of date untrue theory.

To bad you cant find any.

:slaphead: you post sources from sites whose name makes their positional bias abundantly clear, i post from respectable unbiased sources, Oxbridge the royal society, new scientist the BAS and when we talked about oil i gave you official BP review stats but you just ignore them all or attack the source.

[Ima Farmathar]

it is true, but, it is not as eas as that, the earth climate has alwais been changing, the co2, and methane(even more dangerous, you may say, the sun is the only force strong enough to cange climate, but volcanose have changed it in the past, and rigth now only the usa is dumping around 24 billion metric tones of methane evry year* ) are helping on making the climate more inestable, the climate is so complex that it gets warmer in some parts, and cooler in others.

*Methane is over 20 times more effective in trapping heat in the atmosphere than carbon dioxide (CO2) over a 100-year period and is emitted from a variety of natura

[Rush Limbaugh]

its wrong because solar activity rises and falls in cycles of (i'm pretty sure) 11 years however the trend goes up and down but the is no overall up or down trend meaning the long term temperature rises (of continually up for over 11 years) are not explained by this, the idea that solar output increases have caused the continual climb in worldwide temperature is an out of date untrue theory.

You will have to do better than that

you post sources from sites whose name makes their positional bias abundantly clear, i post from respectable unbiased sources, Oxbridge the royal society, new scientist the BAS and when we talked about oil i gave you official BP review stats but you just ignore them all or attack the source.

There is no such thing as an unbiased site on this topic. Ive never claimed mine were any better. All you have is consensous nothing more.

[Gary88]

well humans emitt far more CO2 than volcanoes each year, admitedly a super volcanoe would emitt much more but then it really would have to be super. over 100 times the years volcanic output just to equal man made CO2 output. also if a super volcano goes off we will probably be to dead to care about its climate effect.
its akin to saying that avearge murders dont have any affect on population because eventually a serial killer will come along and kill far more people than the other murderers (a simplified analogy)

You will have to do better than that

better than what? they claimed the last 30 years temp rise was caused by solar cycles which have no overall upward or downward trend and only last 11 years? also their paper they used has been discredited...20 years ago. quite frankly rush you need to do better

(if it was a case of my explanation not being suffienct i will do a better one)

[Rush Limbaugh]

well humans emitt far more CO2 than volcanoes each year, admitedly a super volcanoe would emitt much more but then it really would have to be super. over 100 times the years volcanic output just to equal man made CO2 output.

I dont think so 74,000 years ago, the Toba volcano erupted in a VEI 7 explosion that pumped more than 10,000 times as much CO2 into the air as Mt. St. Helens did. At the maximum, Mt. St. Helens was giving off 22,000,000 kg of C02 daily, so Toba was putting out at least 22 billion kg per day.

And yet there was no global warming from this event. Now how much do we put out a day?



Hey maybe we better get rid of all those carbonated drinks like beer and soda.

[Gary88]

And yet there was no global warming from this event. Now how much do we put out a day?

volcanoes put out masses of sulphates and aerosols which have a cooling affect

particles (known as aerosols) in the atmosphere especially, for instance those resulting from emissions of sulphur dioxide from power stations. These sulphate particles tend to reflect sunlight and cool the system; other particles like soot and mineral dust could well be absorbing radiation and warming the system

Hey maybe we better get rid of all those carbonated drinks like beer and soda.

and on that sparkling example of intelligence i'm going to bed

[Rush Limbaugh]

volcanoes put out masses of sulphates and aerosols which have a cooling affect

And these settle far more quickly than CO2. So where was the spike afterwards?

and on that sparkling example of intelligence i'm going to bed

So you dont think that adds to CO2 emissions? Better close down all them Taco Bells as well

[Oldgamer]

There is no such thing as an unbiased site on this topic. Ive never claimed mine were any better. All you have is consensous nothing more.

And consensus amounts to nothing more than politics. Science has changed since the days when there were just a few theoretical scientists in the United States. Now, there are thousands, all fighting for the Federal Grant money which will only go to the researchers who are the most politically correct.

Scientist #1: I think the temperatures will rise by 5 degrees Fahrenheit in the next 100 years.

Scientist #2: I think the temperatures will rise by 15 degrees Fahrenheit, and cause the massive superstorms and hurricanes!

Fed is watching ...

Scientist #1: My data indicates that if the human race does not become vegetarian, and kill all the domesticated herd animals in the world that pump millions of tons of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere each day, there will be a climatological crisis such as the world has never known.

Fed says, "Hmmm" ...

Scientist #2: Oh, yeah? My data indicates that we could save the atmosphere if only we would create enormous windfarms off of all of our coasts, and in the flatlands from the Dakotas to Indiana.

Fed continues "Hmmm"-ing ...

Scientist #1: I have data that the best and brightest scientists in the world agree on. It is a universal consensus. That is, the Greenland ice cap will melt within the next thirty years, causing the sea levels to rise by at least twenty feet, and the resultant desalinization of the North Atlantic will precipitate a global Ice Age by the year 2050. We have to act now!

Fed smiles, and looks at Scientist #3. "What is your assessment?"

Scientist #3: The planet is merely recovering from the Little Ice Age. That means that this is a natural cycle. Nothing to get excited about.

Fed stands up, and announces, "Scientist #1 gets the grant."

[removeduser_487563287433]

Oldgamer you continue to avoid my request for you to explain why it is arrogance to think humanity can change the atmosphere or the planet.

[Erik]

I dont think so 74,000 years ago, the Toba volcano erupted in a VEI 7 explosion that pumped more than 10,000 times as much CO2 into the air as Mt. St. Helens did. At the maximum, Mt. St. Helens was giving off 22,000,000 kg of C02 daily, so Toba was putting out at least 22 billion kg per day.

So?
Humans put out more than 60 billion kg of CO2 per day.
And I'm not sure how long this eruption lasted, but I doubt lasted for more than a few months.

[kev-o]

So?
Humans put out more than 60 billion kg of CO2 per day.
And I'm not sure how long this eruption lasted, but I doubt lasted for more than a few months.

The earth puts out more CO2 than humans can ever put out in millions of years. In fact, Mt. Saint Helens put out more CO2 than humans can in a century.

Is global warming happening yes.

Is it caused by humans. Hell no.

[apox]

Dude, facts not opinion

The earth puts out more CO2 than humans can ever put out in millions of years. In fact, Mt. Saint Helens put out more CO2 than humans can in a century.

At Mount St Helens the maximum measured emission rate was 2.2X10^7 kg per day. The total amount of gas released during non-eruptive periods from the beginning of July to the end of October was 9.1X10^8 kg

Human emission: 25.028 gigatons in 2003....well in excess of Mt St Helens

in fact average volcanic emissions are around 130-230 million tonnes
thats around 1/150th of human emissions.

[removeduser_487563287433]

That puts an end to that then. But will Kev consider changing his opinion in liue of facts? Let's watch...

[kev-o]

Again, humans aren't causing global warming.

[removeduser_487563287433]

As you can see the subject has formed an opinion and is seeking facts to build around it. This fact does not fit and is discarded.

[apox]

Believe what you like, just don't try to convince others that you are right with misinformation.