Global warming is epic

Just because some people want to take advantage of man made global warming, it doesn't mean it's not happening.

To ignore, and deny, because you're scared of taxes is simply ridiculous.

Originally posted by DaTroof

If not for man-made influences, the Earth would be in a very cold phase right now and getting even colder, according the joint study by Oregon State University and Harvard University.

BS.

Ocean currents and volcanic activity have a greater impact than man could ever achieve due to industry. This study set out to ignore everything except for its conclusion, which was determined before even glancing at any data.

Could ever achieve? Sure in one burst a volcano can have some dynamic effects. But we are talking about a cumulative effect and if you think 1 Billion cars using up 87 million barrels of oil a day do not have an effect on the climate...well.

Your bucket of sand is missing a head.

Originally posted by kozmo
So, I guess that the fact that ALL of the planets in our Solar System have been increasing in temperature can be blamed on humans as well!

ALL planets in our Solar System are not heating up.

There are three fundamental flaws in the 'other planets are warming' argument. Not all planets in the solar system are warming. The sun has shown no long term trend since 1950 and in fact has shown a slight cooling trend in recent decades. There are explanations for why other planets are warming....

...The basis of this argument is that the sun must be causing global warming and in fact, warming throughout the solar system. There are several flaws in this line of thought. Firstly, the characterisation that the whole solar system is warming is erroneous. Around 6 planets or moons out of the more than 100 bodies in the solar system have been observed to be warming. On the other hand, Uranus is cooling (Young 2001).

www.skepticalscience.com...

Originally posted by redtic
there's a significant number that won't even recognize the fact that *something* is going on, irregardless of the cause..

the great part about natural selection is if those people don't act on it themselves, they die!

reply to post by DaTroof


Bunk.

While volcanoes cool the climate on time scales of 1 - 2 years, they act to warm the climate over longer time scales, since they are an important source of natural CO2 to the atmosphere. Reviews of the scientific literature done by Kerrick (2001) and other authors estimate that volcanoes emit between 0.132 and 0.319 gigatons (Gt) of CO2 to the atmosphere each year, which is about 100 to 300 times less than the 36.3 Gt emitted by humans into the atmosphere in 2008 (Le Quere et al., 2009).

source

Oceans circulate our climate, what would be the reason they would cause warming?

This study set out to ignore everything except for its conclusion

The study set out to compare the global mean temperature over 11,300 years... what is there to ignore?

which was determined before even glancing at any data.

Oh they're in it for the money... I suppose you have seen reports on what climate scientists make, how much funding they get etc.. I mean is it worth it, how much money can I make 'scamming people' in this manner? Critical thinking, try it.

reply to post by kozmo

I know you have been show that is false several times, but what's one more? The sun hasn't increased it's activity in observable history enough to warm the entire solar system, every planet further from the sun has longer orbital periods so their warming, cooling cycles last longer.
Try reading this.

reply to post by Legion2024

More bunk we shouldn't be warming for another few thousand years and certainly not to the degree that we are.

reply to post by kingears


I believe that ignoring it is the real evil agenda, when it really hits the fan is when they will slap the chains on us.

reply to post by abeverage


Car emissions are Co I though and fall back to earth in small partials,

The accumulative effects are on a hole, Just one eruption will and does change co2 levels globally. just think how many are erupting at this point in time, Just the accumulative effect of that alone is really not having much effect, To even consider adding in the extremely small % we are putting out there and saying we Humans are the cause is just silly to a point where it is now only about one thing "money"


There is one simple solution They are called the earths LUNGS, Something we have been destroying for a long time, they are called trees, How about just putting together a global plant a tree day where evey company has one day of the year and every employer and employe plants just one tree, The accumulative effect of the levels of Co2 would be massive just in 1 year alone and would negate all Co2 humans have put out there and then some.

would that change climatic change doubtful as everything is in a consistent state of change, We are just here for the ride.

reply to post by Legion2024

While volcanoes cool the climate on time scales of 1 - 2 years, they act to warm the climate over longer time scales, since they are an important source of natural CO2 to the atmosphere. Reviews of the scientific literature done by Kerrick (2001) and other authors estimate that

volcanoes emit between 0.132 and 0.319 gigatons (Gt) of CO2 to the atmosphere each year, which is about 100 to 300 times less than the 36.3 Gt emitted by humans into the atmosphere in 2008 (Le Quere et al., 2009). According to the USGS, with 50 - 60 volcanoes active on the Earth at any one time, it would take about 11,700 extra volcanoes like Hawaii's Kilauea to scale up volcanic emissions of CO2 to match what humans do.

Despite the relatively meager amount of CO2 they put in the air, volcanoes are largely responsible for the natural CO2 in the atmosphere, and helped make life possible on Earth. Why, then, haven't CO2 levels continuously risen over geologic time, turning Earth into a steamy hothouse? In fact, CO2 levels have fallen considerably since the time of the dinosaurs--how can this be? Well, volcano-emitted CO2 is removed from the atmosphere by chemical weathering. This occurs when rain and snow fall on rocks containing silicates. The moisture and silicates react with CO2, pulling it out of the air. The carbon removed from the air is then washed into the sea, where it ends up in ocean sediments that gradually harden into rock. Rates of chemical weathering on Earth have accelerated since the time of the dinosaurs, largely due to the recent uplift of the Himalaya Mountains and Tibetan Plateau. These highlands undergo a tremendous amount of weathering, thanks to their lofty heights and the rains of the Asian Monsoon that they capture. Unfortunately, chemical weathering cannot help us with our current high levels of greenhouse gases, since chemical weathering takes thousands of years to remove significant amounts of CO2 from the atmosphere. It takes about 100,000 years for silicate weathering to remove 63% of the CO2 in the atmosphere. Thus, climate models predict that chemical weathering will solve our greenhouse gas problem in about 100,000 - 200,000 years.

source

reply to post by Kali74


Cool So how do they measure Co2 emitted from all the volcanoes over the entire period they are erupting, And how accurate are those measurements, Do emissions for those eruptions change through the span of the activity..?

Originally posted by redtic

Global warming is epic, long-term study says


A heat spike like this has never happened before, at least not in the last 11,300 years, said climatologist Shaun Marcott, who worked on a new study on global temperatures going back that far.

"If any period in time had a sustained temperature change similar to what we have today, we would have certainly seen that in our record," he said. It is a good indicator of just how fast man-made climate change has progressed.

I didn't Know that we had recorded history that dated back 11,300 years, it must be a very interesting read. The huge problem is... if we had recorded history that dated back 11,300 years, it would be very geographically skewed. If I remember correctly, according to scientists, we were on the verge of ushering in a new ice age as little as two decades ago.

Bollocks. It was not one of the coldest times since the ice age - 100 years ago. Don't be trumpeting git. The earth has been slowly warming in ebbs and flows since the ice age, sometimes fast sometimes slow. One volcano does more damage that man. I've had hotter summers when I was a kid decades ago.

Your being a wee bit dramatic.

reply to post by Legion2024


Why would it matter what the levels of Co2 output of volcanoes were previous to the industrial revolution since the 11,000 or so years previous to the start of industry, the planet was cooler?

Originally posted by pacifier2012
Bollocks. It was not one of the coldest times since the ice age - 100 years ago. Don't be trumpeting git. The earth has been slowly warming in ebbs and flows since the ice age, sometimes fast sometimes slow. One volcano does more damage that man. I've had hotter summers when I was a kid decades ago.

Your being a wee bit dramatic.

The Earth was very cold at the turn of the 20th century. The decade from 1900 to 1909 was colder than 95% of the last 11,300 years, the study found.

That is what the study claims. It also states:

The research team, which included Jeremy Shakun of Harvard and Alan Mix of OSU, primarily used fossils from ocean sediment cores and terrestrial archives to reconstruct the temperature history.

The chemical and physical characteristics of the fossils--including the species as well as their chemical composition and isotopic ratios--provide reliable proxy records for past temperatures by calibrating them to modern temperature records.

Analyses of data from the 73 sites allow a global picture of the Earth's history and provide a new context for climate change analysis.

"The Earth's climate is complex and responds to multiple forcings, including carbon dioxide and solar insolation," Marcott says.

"Both changed very slowly over the past 11,000 years. But in the last 100 years, the increase in carbon dioxide through increased emissions from human activities has been significant.

"It's the only variable that can best explain the rapid increase in global temperatures."

nsf.org

Do you know of a reason why this method of research is 'bollocks' or that it's conclusions or wrong or that the researches are motivated to lie?

reply to post by TheWrightWing


The corporate media, which surely isn't leftist, ignores global warming for the most part.

Originally posted by TheWrightWing
I see CNN is busy advancing the leftist agenda, after ignoring the Rand Paul filibuster. That wasn't news, but the globull warming fairy-tale is

I think you mean 'liberal agenda'.

If you think the media is left wing, you obviously don't know what 'left-wing' means.

There is not left-wing in mainstream America, media or government.

Originally the left-wing were anti-statists, and the right those who wanted to maintain the establishment. The right mainstream has changed this in order to confuse you.

American Liberalism is not left-wing. It is just a way to appease people, and keep them passive and ignorant. It doesn't want to change the system, only prop it up with handouts.

"Liberalism is not socialism and never will be" - Winston Churchill.

reply to post by ANOK


It's not even Liberal anymore, if it ever was... it's corporate and I don't think it's a conspiracy theory to deduce that the status quo is what corporate America wants, thus barely mentioning Global Warming and never without one of the think tank mouth pieces to counter the science. So unbelievably sad.

reply to post by Kali74


Yeah you're right, it really isn't liberalism.

People have to understand that the media is not going to go against the establishment, because it feeds them.

The mainstream media is capitalist, obviously, and is not going to bite the hand that feeds it.

The MSM is a part of the establishment, just like government, and no real change can come from either.

Originally posted by Legion2024
reply to post by abeverage

 

Car emissions are Co I though and fall back to earth in small partials,

The accumulative effects are on a hole, Just one eruption will and does change co2 levels globally. just think how many are erupting at this point in time, Just the accumulative effect of that alone is really not having much effect, To even consider adding in the extremely small % we are putting out there and saying we Humans are the cause is just silly to a point where it is now only about one thing "money"


There is one simple solution They are called the earths LUNGS, Something we have been destroying for a long time, they are called trees, How about just putting together a global plant a tree day where evey company has one day of the year and every employer and employe plants just one tree, The accumulative effect of the levels of Co2 would be massive just in 1 year alone and would negate all Co2 humans have put out there and then some.

would that change climatic change doubtful as everything is in a consistent state of change, We are just here for the ride.

edit on 8-3-2013 by Legion2024 because: 11:11

edit on 8-3-2013 by Legion2024 because: (no reason given)

Thing is we really do not need to be burning fossil fuels for transportation there is where your point is about money. The technology is there and mature to never have to build another single pollution emitting vehicle but GREED is holding us back. Big OIL GREED! Pure and simple. Sure planting trees will be good air scrubbers but think about all the waste and pollution draining into our streams, rivers and oceans. This could all end but stopping the production of oil burning vehicles...

Originally posted by redtic

If not for man-made influences, the Earth would be in a very cold phase right now and getting even colder, according the joint study by Oregon State University and Harvard University.

Sooooo... where's the problem?
I don't know about you, but I hate cold weather.

Thanks Global Warming... if it wasn't for you I'd be freezing my azz off right now.

reply to post by redtic


I have just written an essay on this very subject, hottest 75% of the last 11,500 years does not mean anything , the earth has had 2 warming periods and one cooling period in the past 1000 years that beet our current warm epoch period hands down... check out 1000-1100 AD 1200-1300 AD. Also there is no correlation between anthropologically produced GHGs and global warming but suprising our global temprature does follow the suns' activity ( strong positive correlation from solar forcing).

Also the data is questionable, guess what the margin of error for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)? Wellf the data collected in the us had errors due to a 10m proximity of mthe majority of the thermometer stations to heat sources ( if u can believe it Watts 2009) estimated difference that these errors are predicted to have over the 20th century is 0.7 oC this is argued to be within the margin of the reported increase in temperatures attributed to global warming

if anyone would like to read my full essay pm me with email address and ill send it too you , i wasnt anti GW until i was forced by my uni to write the arguement for it, i am suprisingly quite convinced, but then i have just studied one side.. all peer reviewed studies though.. I think we are obviously impacting GW but did you know that water vapour is the most significant GHG and Co2 has little effect ( still an effect ) on GW, studies have shown that the majority of previous warming periods have been triggered by the SUN and our orbit/ the Atlantic Ocean thermohaline circulation multi-decadal variability (AMO) (Chylek et al 2009), and not C02 these events so are way more severe than our current event, we are fubaring up the world in many other ways though, but always look at motive ( poor countries to develope need cheap c02 rich energy ) Also 20bn goes towards funding GW research in the US alone ( follow the money i want too keep my paycheck...)

References
Caillon, N., Severinghaus, J. P., Jouzel, J., Barnola, J. M., Kang, J., & Lipenkov, V. Y. (2003). Timing of atmospheric CO2 and Antarctic temperature changes across Termination III. Science, 299(5613), 1728-1731.
Chylek, P., Folland, C. K., Lesins, G., Dubey, M. K., & Wang, M. (2009). Arctic air temperature change amplification and the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation. Geophysical Research Letters, 36(14), L14801.

Peterson, T. C., & Manton, M. J. (2009). Monitoring changes in climate extremes: a tale of international collaboration. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 89(9), 1266-1271.

Robinson, A. B., Robinson, N. E., & Soon, W. (2007). Environmental Effects of Increased Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide. Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, 12, 79-90.

Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, R.B. Alley, T. Berntsen, N.L. Bindoff, Z. Chen, A. Chidthaisong, J.M. Gregory, G.C. Hegerl, M. Heimann, B. Hewitson, B.J. Hoskins, F. Joos, J. Jouzel, V. Kattsov, U. Lohmann, T. Matsuno, M. Molina, N. Nicholls, J. Overpeck, G. Raga, V. Ramaswamy, J. Ren, M. Rusticucci, R. Somerville, T.F. Stocker, P. Whetton, R.A. Wood and D. Wratt, 2007: Technical Summary. In: Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M. Tignor and H.L. Miller (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY,USA.

Soon, W., & Baliunas, S. (2003). Proxy climatic and environmental changes of the past 1000 years. Climate Research, 23(2), 89-110.
Watts, A. (2009). Is the U.S. surface temperature record reliable?: how do we know global warming is a problem if we can't trust the U.S. temperature record? Chicago, IL, The Heartland Institute.

I posted this in a related methane thread. This goes along with the video I posted earlier in this thread, and the topic here.
--
I don't know exactly what point the thread is at here, but I want to provide some data on why there should be a concern for methane (CH4) leaking into the atmosphere, especially in the arctic regions.

The images below were referenced from CMOS (Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society), and can be downloaded [here] (9 mb pdf.)



This picture is pretty self explanatory. Here we can see a distinct rise in all methane (CH4) levels since around 2007. All models/formulas are rising, not just 1 or 2 potentially incorrect ones.



Another great collection of data imagery, showing methane in the Arctic atmosphere, starting at 2006, then 2007, 2008, and 2009. It is clearly increasing in methane concentrations, though the next images show that trending more clearly.



This image shows 2010 and 2011, the most dense and red one to date, meaning there is a lot more methane in the Arctic atmosphere than who knows how far back exactly. Notice the graph on the bottom showing the increasing trend of methane since ~2007.



Here is a nice image showing that things are really warming up.



This is a great image of the feedback loop going on right now in the arctic. Some things to know are:

Albedo -

It is defined as the ratio of reflected radiation from the surface to incident radiation upon it.

And more in particular, the Ice Albedo Feedback Loop

A positive feedback climate process where a change in the area of snow-covered land, ice caps, glaciers or sea ice alters the albedo. This change in albedo acts to reinforce the initial alteration in ice area. Cooling tends to increase ice cover and hence the albedo, reducing the amount of solar energy absorbed and leading to more cooling. Conversely, warming tends to decrease ice cover and hence the albedo, increasing the amount of solar energy absorbed, leading to more warming.

So as this methane trapped in the Arctic regions will be released, causing more warming, causing more ice to melt and release the methane hydrates.



This last image is a recent shot of the Beaufort Sea, a sea in the Arctic ocean.

According to this post, and the note from one a user over here

He states that:

If taken as a simplistic predictor of the 2013 melt season, we are 51 days ahead of last season.