JoeReal

Their views and opinions may not necessarily be the same as mine...

From: http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=1387081
The Psychology of Global Warming: Alarm-ist Versus Alarm-ing

The vast majority of credible climate scientists — well over 95 percent, according to specialists in assessing scientists' opinions — agree that the average temperatures of the oceans, the land surface of the planet and the lower atmosphere (anything lower than the tip of Mount Everest) have been climbing at an accelerating rate.

The same specialists say that nearly as many scientists agree that manmade greenhouse gas emissions are a significant factor — and a good many say the only significant factor — in the dangerous global warming now under way.

If 95 of the world's best, most experienced experts in child well-being were to tell you that your child was under lethal attack — and with dramatic signs already visible if you only look — would you say, "I think I'll wait until the other five experts are convinced before I do anything about it?"


there's more, just click the link.

TE

I don't personally believe in a future ice age. Because I don't want to? Because prophecy predicts the opposite? Anyway I have been living in the same area for 57 years (central Florida) minus 6 years and it is definitely warmer these last few years. But not warm enough. There is still the threat of frost to live with every winter. I hate cold weather more than hurricanes. By the way, do you know how Greenland got its name? It was not covered with glaciers when the Vikings got there. It was a beautiful grassy land to raise their cattle and sheep and grow great grapes. So the last ice age that covered Greenland in a glacier was just one of those cycles. Jmho, TE

JoeReal

TE, global climatic change have been recognized by almost all (100%) scientists, whether they believe in global warming (95%) or not (5%). The climatic changes for example included extreme mood swings such as prolonged drought and stronger rainfall and flooding in some places. Prolonged heat wave and extreme cold snap in others. A few places will have minor changes like perhaps Central Florida. For California, our summers and winters have generally become milder with more rainfall received. In some the summer velocity have increased.

Generally the temperate zones are moving further north the polar regions shrinking. The increased atmospheric temperature would increase the air's capacity to carry moisture, thus we will have heavier rains and stronger hurricanse. The polar ice caps are shrinking, the tundras and permafrost a-melting releasing more methane into the air which is 25 times more effective greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. Thus we are right now experiencing positive feed back loop. A positive feedback loop is dangerous as it spawns accelaration of events, each cycle exponentially increasing, leading to runaway greenhouse scenario like Venus is in the extreme thermal death trap possibility.

We (system modelers) have looked everywhere, there is no trigger for the next global ice age if we continue this route, but a runaway global warming, unless we will experience once again, seismic upheaval and volcanic eruptions that could blanket the planet to block out most sunlight and triggering the ice age. BTW, we are 30,000 years overdue for such kind of cataclysmic event, based on geologic history. So it could happen anytime. While we await for that event, it is still our responsibility to keep our atmosphere very sane to live in, the best way we can. Everyone will die at one point or another, at least before I die, I'm helping make a better world for the next generations.

momoese

You the man Joe!

jeffreyp

I think it's really hypocritical of all these lobbyists and politicians pointing their fingers at companies (and just about everyone else) for causing global warming, but then they themselves are going about driving around everywhere in their SUV's! There are many factors that cause global warming and one big factor is how close the planets are to the sun. Scientists have noted that the ice caps on mars are melting at an alarming rate.

http://www.mos.org/cst-archive/article/80/9.html

A couple interesting articles...

Dr Sami Solanki, the director of the renowned Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research in Gottingen, Germany, who led the research, said: "The Sun has been at its strongest over the past 60 years and may now be affecting global temperatures.

"The Sun is in a changed state. It is brighter than it was a few hundred years ago and this brightening started relatively recently - in the last 100 to 150 years."


http://www.chronicle.duke.edu/vnews/.../43562bbfb82ca

http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=17977

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...ixnewstop.html



http://www.space.com/searchforlife/d...ti_001127.html



Interestingly, NASA has verified that the sun is getting brighter and hotter. This is having a dramatic effect on the rise of overall temperature on the earth. And that is causing the ocean belt around the equator to particularly heat up and cause more frequent and powerful storms – as we have definitely seen this hurricane/typhoon season.

JoeReal

Thanks Momoese!

Jeffrey, I know that the sun is brighter, and could be brighter by about 10% and this what makes our current conditions worse and the greenhouse effect accelerated.

Based on our models, even if the sun were brighter, and assuming pre-industrial atmospheric conditions where normal uncontaminated cloud cover, massive areas of white capped mountains and glacial areas, the snow's reflectivity, and most of all, insignificant amount of greenhouse gasses, the effects of a brighter sun are attenuated because most radiation would be harmlessly reflected back into space. Thus a 10% in the sun's output would increase our temperature by at best 0.5%, which would translate to a very slight global temperature increase, something about 0.25 deg F only.

Now put a transparent blanket over the earth, in the form of greenhouse gasses, the refected radiation which is in the near infrared, would be absorbed instead. Couple this with the accelerated melting of glaciers, snowmelt all over the world, the loss of arctic white relfective surface areas, we will be absorbing those exra 10% sunlight output at greater efficiencies than ever. It will no longer be as attentuated like before. Plus the increased global temperature caused by man due to greenhouse emissions, have begun to release methane gasses from the melting permafrosts, this is a runaway one, as methane is 25 times more effective greenhouse gas than CO2. Mankind is the trigger, and not the sun. The fact that the sun has increased its radiation intensity is ALL the reason why we should stop the process of a runaway greenhouse warming. The atmosphere that contains heat trapping gases, the global surface which now has lower albedo (reflectivity) makes it very ideal conditions for runaway global warming in the face of increased solar instensity.

So shall we just eat, drink, pollute and be merry for tomorrow we will be toast anyway? We can do something, and we have the science and technology. We can prevent hell on earth.

jeffreyp

I don't disagree with you Joe. I just wanted to point out that the sun is a big contributor to this, and it's something we have no control over. Do we know the reasons why Greenland was as lush as it was a few hundred years ago or did man have an impact on that? Or was the climate warmer because of normal cycles the earth goes through? The supposed biggest contributor to greenhouse gases is the automobile, yet almost no one is willing to give up their car for pure electric. I personally don't have a strong opinion either way, but I think factors such as Solar variation and natural cycles are largely igonored by the lobbyists. Take for example the melting of the polar caps on mars that's happening at a massive scale..Who knows, maybe increased CO2 will result in larger, and healthier plants on a global scale. Since carbon dioxide is used by plants to capture and store energy, there may be a fertilizing effect as levels of the gas rise. This, combined with longer growing seasons, fewer frosts and more precipitation, among other factors, which could be a benefit to us all?

take a peek at these articles..

http://www.junkscience.com/news/robinson.htm
http://www.nationalcenter.org/KyotoQ...nsAnswers.html

JoeReal

Jeffrey, no problem, even if you disagreed. These are lively discussions and of course, not everything I pointed out I should believe 100% myself.

There used to be palm trees in Antartica, several hundred million years ago. It could be warming or also it could be tilt of the earth, or could be different continental spacing.

You are right that the sun's intensity should be a big factor and should be mentioned to lobbyists, and it multiplies the global warming effect of increased CO2 and other greenhouse gases.

Increased CO2 will increase crop production IF temperature are within nomal range or optimal. High temperature could short-circuit the photosynthetic appartus of most C3 types of plants reducing their yield.

jeffreyp

I think if everyone took small positive steps, it could make a big difference. For example, replacing incandescent bulbs with flourescents, car pooling, taking a train, turning off appliances, recycle, and most importantly...plant some trees in your yard - these are all things that will benefit us all now and in the future!

modenacart

This is not true by a long shot. Volcanos send out tremendous amounts of CO2. What man produce does not come close to what the earth produces naturally. From what I understand is the scientist that are studying global warming predicted the earth temperature have risen one degree on average. I find that it would be very hard to substantiate this. I doubt science has been able to measure temperature with that kind of accuracy over the last couple of hundred years it has been measuring temperature and you also are going to have stack-up errors when you compile the data. I am not saying that we should pollute, I am all for pollution control, I just think that the global warming argument is the next doomsday prophecy. Man loves doomsday prophecies. I guess if we really want to cut back on CO2 we should eat all the cows and log all the forest to prevent trees from falling and rotting away. Rotting plant life produces massive amounts of CO2 too and cows fart too much. Also the hole in the ozone layer has proven to shrink and grow. To think that one understands the complicity of weather is insane. I believe that they also contribute the high rates of hurricanes to El Niño, which has been going on for thousands of years. This year was predicted to be the worst ever but we have had only one that I can recall right now.

jeffreyp

I suppose it's really too much to ask for some intellectual honesty from politicians. Al Gore was touting that Bush is paying off scientists to give a discenting view on global warming! Unbelieveable..

I guess Bush is paying off the Canadians now..

http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/...ming020507.htm

mrbungalow

The world has too many people and too little resources, too unevenly spread. That's the problem.

It's funny with the energy sector: Politicians allways talk about environmentally friendly cars etc. but in Brazil for example they have driven alcohol-powered cars for decades. Surely we have technology to make high-performance alcohol engines as well as a sustainable methanol/ethanol supply? In fact, the ideal fuel-mixture for an engine (Max energy output pr. litre) is said to be part alcohol and part petrol. Problem is, if we start utilizing alcohol, what happens to the oil-companies that rule the world? Bio-diesel is also a possibillity, if someone finds a way to get rid of all the excess sulfur this bio-diesel usually is loaded with. Several companies are allready online selling DIY bio-diesel apparatus.

Norway is definately getting warmer. The glaciers are getting smaller. Every 5 years, we have a "super summer", we had one in 1997, 2002, and probably this coming summer in 2007. In the years inbetween I think the winters are warmer but summers are generally cooler.

__________________

momoese

I think that the argument shouldn't be about whether it's a natural occurrence or not, it should be about how to best stop it.

I heard about a plan to send some giant reflectors into space to stop some of the suns heat from getting here. Interesting idea to say the least. Here is some talk about it:

http://www.futurepundit.com/archives/002868.html

modenacart

If its a natural occurrence, why should we be trying to stop it? If its time for the planet to warm itself then its going to do it whether we like it or not.

momoese

Me thinks it would make for a longer life......and for the future generations too.

We may have the technology to control the climate. It's just a matter of funding it.

modenacart

I think we think too much of ourselves. The world is bigger than us.

jeffreyp

I thought this was too funny...

http://www.drudgereport.com/flash8.htm

modenacart

I thought this was interesting.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17382210/

sunfish

Bump

caliboy1994

__________________
"The ultimate goal of farming is not the growing of crops, but the cultivation and perfection of human beings."
~ Masanobu Fukuoka

Find me on linktree here as Solarpunk Farmer:
https://linktr.ee/solarpunkfarmer