Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by obeygiant, Apr 3, 2010.
Good news-- for the Earth.
Quite a difference from 2007. Arctic Sea Ice Shrinks to Record Low.
This will all be over in 20 years anyways.
What do you mean? Like we'll all be under water or get hit by an asteroid?
No, we'll be living like we always have. Global warming is going to be a footnote on some history book.
He's referring to the natural warming cycle we're going through. Twenty years and back to the ice age.
It's cold outside,told you global climate change is a myth.
Are some people ever going to realise the difference between climate and weather?
Perhaps. But I doubt it. There's too much science behind it to dismiss it too easily.
But I can wait. I'm 49 years old. I should be around in twenty years and by then we should have a better understanding of the issue. In the meantime I'm still going to continue my efforts to reduce, reuse and recycle. That's a good habit to get into regardless of the truth of Global Warming.
And who knows? Maybe in twenty years ZA will get to gloat and say "I told you so!" to all us GW believers. I wouldn't bet on it though.
Yes, because arctic sea ice approaching normal levels is the equivalent of local weather....
Oh I will, you will never hear the end of it, and I will not be pleasant in my gloating.
Very astute of you to realise that.Ice coverage is approaching 1980/2000 levels, note coverage and not thickness. Because the Bering sea is caught between two low pressure systems resulting in unusually cold weather conditions for a few weeks it does not mean climate change is not happening.Weather not climate!
And if you are wrong? How sincere will your mea culpa be?
It really doesn't matter either way, our temps fluctuate on a worldly level, this is just another fluctuation that goes along with a liberal agenda.
I won't be wrong, and if I am. We are ****ed no matter what.
Why try then? Why even care? That's the defeatist spirit we all need!
Because i know you are wrong.
You simply can't argue with people who think that 200 or 300 years of weather data is representative of billions of years of actual weather changes. Global warming is simply a blimp on the radar.
I agree with Zombie, in 20 or 30 years this global warming nonesense will be nothing more than a sentence in a history book.
Sorry, I was wrong, reliable readings only go back 150 years.
Yup I am sure with all of your infinite wisdom that you know better than the top climatologists at MIT, Harvard and Stanford.
The icepack issue may not be as simple as "there is or is not a global warming problem". Long ago I heard it put forth that true global warming might actually lead to an increase in polar ice (it was a long time ago I heard that, I have no source to cite). The logic was that warming would not be enough (~2°F average) to raise the polar temperatures above the melt point but would cause an increase in atmospheric moisture, some of which would collect at the poles, adding to the icepacks.
That does seem like sound logic to me, what little I know. If it is a valid vector in the astoundingly complex picture that is atmospheric and climate science, then some other thing is at work at the poles. My wild guess would be something darkening the ice, making it reflect less IR from the sun in the summertime, but that is just a stab in the dark.
There are a lot of things going on that affect climate. If stuff we are doing is having a real effect, we really ought to stop doing that.
I completely agree that we (as a civilization/race/people) may something to do with it, however I don't think that we have had enough of a impact to be solely accountable for the changes. In other words, the natural changes in the earths heating/cooling have more of an effect than we as a people.
Temperature readings come from many other sources than thermometers. Tree-rings and ice cores for starters.
Frankly it's wonerfully hilarious that you think you're disproven the whole scientific field of climate change by tracking the invention and use of thermometers !
Scientists do not for one second claim that we are solely accountable for climate change. Just that it is highly likely that our activities are contributing to an unprecedented rate of warming.
I never said that I disproved anything. All I've said is that the time that reliable records have been kept are extremely tiny in comparison to the billions, if not trillions, of years that Earth has existed. From what I understand about the scientific community, and from what I learned in college science classes, this would not normally be considered enough data to draw such conclusions that have been drawn.
Perhaps scientists aren't, but it would seem a majority of people here and elsewhere think that we are the main cause of this so called global warming.
"So called" warming ?
Global warming in the sense of the effects that are attributed to humans.
What is your understanding of the rate of change in temperatures we are currently experiencing?