Global Warming

[Calliso]

Ender sorry you can;t see the video But I will try to summarize it like you requested.

But in the first part of the video he takes a global temperature anomaly chart for 2008 and compares it with a satillite picture of the earth at night showing all the urban areas lighted up. From the comparison you could see that the red warming areas do not all correnspond to the urban areas.

In the second part it talks about even if you threw out the temperature data there is still evidence for warming in the natural world.
And cited a study published in Nature that studied 29,500 sets of physical and biological data found that on a global scale 90% of the changes were in a direction expected as a response to warming.
This appears to be a summary of that study.
theworld.org/pdf/natureclimatechange.pdf

This is good too it;s the supplementary info for that study and lists a bunch of other studies.
nature.com/nature/journal/v453/n7193/extref/nature06937-s1.pdf

And lastly copying and pasting from here. cce.890m.com/temperature-record/

The surface temperature over land is recorded at meteorological stations throughout the world (also called weather stations or surface stations). Skeptics do not trust these records because they are believed to be hopelessly contaminated by the urban heat island effect. Because asphalt and concrete absorb and radiate heat, and because industry, buildings and vehicles generate heat, increasing urbanization around thermometers would introduce a warming bias.

If we ignore the records from urban areas, we still know that the world has warmed for several reasons:

• Rural areas are warming.
• The oceans are warming.
• Glaciers and permafrost are melting, as are the ice sheets and sea ice (see section 10).
• Sea levels are rising (see section 10).
• Plants and animals are moving poleward.

All of these independent observations point to widespread warming.

 

[Michaelo]

vz71, you can download and read the publication from which I quoted here for more details.

Also, this site discusses the history of temperature measurement and developments in measurement accuracy.

 

[Oscarthecat]

Originally Posted by Oscarthecat
As I’ve said before, human beings have been afraid of the weather turning against them for as far back as we have records.

It certainly does have something to do with it- it is the anthropological underpinning of the global warming industry. Human beings have a deep, subconscious fear and anxiety in regard to how they are so completely at the mercy of the weather.

Scientists, being human, are also naturally subject to this subconscious anxiety- and so it is natural that this fear reveals itself in their scientific work.

I know that many of them are also driven by the money thrown at them, but I have to keep reminding myself that they are only human, and so even though the most genuine among them might actually believe the hype they put forth, they are doing it for the same reason that shamans wave dead chickens at thunderclouds.

Originally Posted by Oscarthecat
The modern incarnation climate change anxiety is driven by the same instinct that motivated human beings to shoot arrows at clouds thousands of years ago.

You have no scientific data to back up that opinion.

What kind of data do you need?

People fear the weather now. People feared the weather then.
People have always expressed fears that heat, cold, lack of rain, too much rain, and all other climactic conditions outside of their control would ruin their crops, or cause a landslide, or expose them to unlivable conditions, or otherwise end their way of life.

People have blamed themselves for changes in climate throughout human history too. Whereas people used to think that bad weather happened because the gods were angry that they didn’t sacrifice enough animals (or people, in some cases)- now people think that bad weather happens because they threw their plastic bottle in a green bin instead of a blue bin, or because they left too many lights on, or because they asked for plastic instead of paper bags, or whatever other environmental superstition ingrained into them.

Maybe it is just an observation, but it is nonetheless supported by volumes and volumes of historical records, mythological themes, and other similar artifacts of societies that have come and gone. Think, for example, about how so many early societies have their own version of a flood story- perfect example of this common anxiety.

Originally Posted by Oscarthecat]
The only difference is that Al Gore and GE are selling the arrows now.

Really? What does this have to do with Global Warming?

Oh, nothing, I guess- except that they are the ones profiting off of your anxiety- as opposed to shamans or witch doctors from ancient history, or even the “rain maker” salesmen that were so active during the dust bowl.

I’m not surprised that no one in this thread has really addressed or even acknowledged the connection between those producing your research and those who stand to profit from it- It seems that the environmental movement simply has a “blind spot” about that issue.

 

[Valke2]

Valke2;4965608:

It certainly does have something to do with it- it is the anthropological underpinning of the global warming industry. Human beings have a deep, subconscious fear and anxiety in regard to how they are so completely at the mercy of the weather.

Scientists, being human, are also naturally subject to this subconscious anxiety- and so it is natural that this fear reveals itself in their scientific work.

I know that many of them are also driven by the money thrown at them, but I have to keep reminding myself that they are only human, and so even though the most genuine among them might actually believe the hype they put forth, they are doing it for the same reason that shamans wave dead chickens at thunderclouds.

What kind of data do you need?

People fear the weather now. People feared the weather then.
People have always expressed fears that heat, cold, lack of rain, too much rain, and all other climactic conditions outside of their control would ruin their crops, or cause a landslide, or expose them to unlivable conditions, or otherwise end their way of life.

People have blamed themselves for changes in climate throughout human history too. Whereas people used to think that bad weather happened because the gods were angry that they didn’t sacrifice enough animals (or people, in some cases)- now people think that bad weather happens because they threw their plastic bottle in a green bin instead of a blue bin, or because they left too many lights on, or because they asked for plastic instead of paper bags, or whatever other environmental superstition ingrained into them.

Maybe it is just an observation, but it is nonetheless supported by volumes and volumes of historical records, mythological themes, and other similar artifacts of societies that have come and gone. Think, for example, about how so many early societies have their own version of a flood story- perfect example of this common anxiety.

Oh, nothing, I guess- except that they are the ones profiting off of your anxiety- as opposed to shamans or witch doctors from ancient history, or even the “rain maker” salesmen that were so active during the dust bowl.

I’m not surprised that no one in this thread has really addressed or even acknowledged the connection between those producing your research and those who stand to profit from it- It seems that the environmental movement simply has a “blind spot” about that issue.

That’s pretty funny. Because no fossil fuel/energy companies have the money or inclination to influence you against global warming. It is indeed a bizzaro world where energy companies have convinced so many that it is actually the industries seeking to “go green” that are the real danger.

 

[Calliso]

Oscarthecat;4968357:

That’s pretty funny. Because no fossil fuel/energy companies have the money or inclination to influence you against global warming. It is indeed a bizzaro world where energy companies have convinced so many that it is actually the industries seeking to “go green” that are the real danger.

Yeah seems like the skeptics here are ignoring just who funds much of the scientists who claim to be skeptical of global warming.
But I forget clearly the skeptics are the ones with the pure motives… But seriously it boggles me that people can;t see that oil and coal and other related companies would have a very good reason to cast doubt on the science of human caused global warming. Or to try and make it look like a good thing.

Though exxon mobil it seems has stopped their funding of global warming skeptics recently. publicintegrity.org/articles/entry/731/

video.google.com/videosearch?q=the+denial+machine&emb=0&aq=f# (yes I went to google lol only because I couldn;t find the whole video on youtube)

 

[Valke2]

Chances are that the companies that are going to make money from alternative clean energy are the current energy companies. They have the capital and ability to invest here.

 

[vz71]

vz71, you can download and read the publication from which I quoted here for more details.

Also, this site discusses the history of temperature measurement and developments in measurement accuracy.

How nice of you to do the search. Unfortunately, the sites listed do not answer any of the questions I posed.

In case they were forgotten, here they are again.

Please clarify for us all, a century ago they were able to get a global temperature to within a tenth of a degree…how? Using what instruments? How did they achieve this accuracy? How many temperature samples were taken? Where were the samples taken from?

 

[a_burger]

Jesus said that during the last days in our grace period the world will see distress that will be so bad that all men will faint from fear. At the Mt.Olivet discourse Jesus said the signs near the end of the age will be famines and earthquake activity. Famines are a result of global cooling. I’m sure Al Gore and his followers will tell us that the increase in earthquake activity is due to global warming. Gore used to be a pro life Sothern Baptist Christian.

If you don’t believe we’re in the lst days of the age please refer to Bishop Malachy prophecy. His prophecy says the next pope will be the last pope prior to the milleneium period. You can do a search with his name on the internet.

If you don’t believe we are having more earthquakes just do a search on your computer. There has been a major increase in earthquakes in diverse places.

 

[Valke2]

Jesus said that during the last days in our grace period the world will see distress that will be so bad that all men will faint from fear.

What if we are fainting from heat exhaustion?

At the Mt.Olivet discourse Jesus said the signs near the end of the age will be famines and earthquake activity.

And we’ve been having both for the last 2,000 years.

Famines are a result of global cooling. I’m sure Al Gore and his followers will tell us that the increase in earthquake activity is due to global warming. Gore used to be a pro life Sothern Baptist Christian.

What does this opinion and Al Gore’s upbrining have to do with climate change? For that matter what does your understanding of scripture have to do with climate change? I thought you said it was a scam. Now you seem to be saying it is biblically ordained.

If you don’t believe we’re in the lst days of the age please refer to Bishop Malachy prophecy. His prophecy says the next pope will be the last pope prior to the milleneium period. You can do a search with his name on the internet.

I’ll pass thanks. Shouldn’t this be the topic of a seperate thread?

 

[vz71]

If you don’t believe we’re in the lst days of the age please refer to Bishop Malachy prophecy. His prophecy says the next pope will be the last pope prior to the milleneium period. You can do a search with his name on the internet.

The prophecy provides a list of Popes. It does not say that the next pope will be the last. There could be many popes between the current one and the ‘Peter the Roman’ spoken of in the prophecy.

 

[Oscarthecat]

What if we are fainting from heat exhaustion?

And we’ve been having both for the last 2,000 years.

What does this opinion and Al Gore’s upbrining have to do with climate change? For that matter what does your understanding of scripture have to do with climate change? I thought you said it was a scam. Now you seem to be saying it is biblically ordained.

I’ll pass thanks. Shouldn’t this be the topic of a seperate thread?

It seems we’ve found common ground again.

 

[Oscarthecat]

The prophecy provides a list of Popes. It does not say that the next pope will be the last. There could be many popes between the current one and the ‘Peter the Roman’ spoken of in the prophecy.

It isn’t prophetic- it is a list, written with as much precision as Nostradamus.

But it is also well known for its ability to derail threads.

 

[a_burger]

I’ve studied Bishop Malachy for years. To say there could be more popes is really a faint of heart response. That’s not to say you could be correct. In addition when many of the prophecy experts stated the fig tree ripening was the establishment of Is rael in 1948 it was Pope Pius XII who stated it was the Jews getting Jerusalem back started the generation countdown. This time frame appears to coordinate with Bishop Malachy’s prophecy. Whatever I’m sure you agree we should prepare for the worst and hope for the best.

We as Catholics should be very encouraged to review the house full of Jesuits that lived eight blocks away from ground zero for the nuclear bomb dropped in Hiroshima. Not one of the eight Jesuits there had the slightest injuries. They were examined by hundreds of doctors. There was an explanation however. The Jesuits took the message of Fatima in 1917 and prayed the rosary everyday. What else could it have been? With the dire warnings of Jesus for the last days of the age (not the world) shouldn’t we prepared to evangelize.

I was shocked to find out that Martin Luther died praying the rosary. Wouldn’t it be nice if all the Lutherans who really wanted to follow Luther would pray the rosary. Let’s put God in our thoughts about our present day situation. Even thoough the global warming scam has been pretty well exposed, we should worry about what Jesus said.

 

[Monty_Arch]

Scientists have long established that the Antarctic Peninsula is one of the most rapidly warming spots on Earth.

What about t that temperature readings over the rest of Antarctica indicate the continent has cooled over the previous 35 years, or that the UN’s climate panel estimates net snow mass increases in Antarctica this century?

 

[Valke2]

What about t that temperature readings over the rest of Antarctica indicate the continent has cooled over the previous 35 years, or that the UN’s climate panel estimates net snow mass increases in Antarctica this century?

Snow increases and rising tempertures in the Artic pennusulia are not mutually exclusive.

 

[Monty_Arch]

Snow increases and rising tempertures in the Artic pennusulia are not mutually exclusive.

Did you not read my post or remember yours?

Originally Posted by Valke2 View Post
Scientists have long established that the Antarctic Peninsula is one of the most rapidly warming spots on Earth.

Monty:

What about t that temperature readings over the rest of Antarctica indicate the continent has cooled over the previous 35 years, or that the UN’s climate panel estimates net snow mass increases in Antarctica this century?

---

 

[Calliso]

Snow increases and rising tempertures in the Artic pennusulia are not mutually exclusive.

Nope though small nitpick here. I am pretty sure Artic is used to refer to the northern hemisphere far north. Antartic penisula would be more accurate.

Anyway more info on Antartic warming realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/01/state-of-antarctica-red-or-blue/langswitch_lang/th

And probably more imporant info on how could sea ice be increasing down there when it’s suppose to be getting warmer?

arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/global.sea.ice.area.pdf
One important detail about the article in the Daily Tech is that the author is comparing
the GLOBAL sea ice area from December 31, 2008 to same variable for December 31,
1979. In the context of climate change, GLOBAL sea ice area may not be the most
relevant indicator. Almost all global climate models project a decrease in the Northern
Hemisphere sea ice area over the next several decades under increasing greenhouse
gas scenarios. But, the same model responses of the Southern Hemisphere sea ice
are less certain. In fact, there have been some recent studies suggesting the amount of
sea ice in the Southern Hemisphere may initially increase as a response to atmospheric
warming through increased evaporation and subsequent snowfall onto the sea ice.
(Details: sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/06/050630064726.htm )/B

 

[Sair]

I am sure
The National Academies, NASA, MIT, and other top scientists
Will continue to argue this point,

However,

How do we protect social justice?

Here’s a thought - we could allow people the choice as to whether they have children or not, educate them as to the options available (and birth control is always better than abortion), and not pressure women, in particular, to have children by suggesting they are incomplete without them.

When populations of other animals rise beyond sustainable levels, we generally meet the challenge in one of two ways - culling or sterilising. Which do you think is the most humane? I know which one I would choose, but eventually, as populations soar and resources become more scarce, the day will come when we won’t get a choice. War and genocide will do the business for us.

And after all, it’s not as if the human race will die out any time soon, unless we succeed in completely trashing the planet and wiping ourselves out as well. As a species, we’re in pretty good shape. We just need to learn how to find the balance between our own interests and those of the rest of the planet.

 

[a_burger]

Here’s a thought - we could allow people the choice as to whether they have children or not, educate them as to the options available (and birth control is always better than abortion), and not pressure women, in particular, to have children by suggesting they are incomplete without them.

When populations of other animals rise beyond sustainable levels, we generally meet the challenge in one of two ways - culling or sterilising. Which do you think is the most humane? I know which one I would choose, but eventually, as populations soar and resources become more scarce, the day will come when we won’t get a choice. War and genocide will do the business for us.

And after all, it’s not as if the human race will die out any time soon, unless we succeed in completely trashing the planet and wiping ourselves out as well. As a species, we’re in pretty good shape. We just need to learn how to find the balance between our own interests and those of the rest of the planet.

 

[a_burger]

I think when you read that in the last days 2/3 of the population will die in a short seven year period. When you have scarce resources you have war.