Greenhouse gases overpowering natural cooling

[KittenKoder]

Math lesson:

CO2 is less than 1% of the atmosphere (been away from this for so long I forgot already). We are increasing it by 30% ... so that's a .3% change (at best) in the atmosphere. Which means only a .3% change in the temperature for our contribution ... seriously? You're worried about that?

I think that math may be off.

It would be a .3% change in temperature ONLY if there was a 1:1 correlation between CO2 increase and temperature increase. I doubt temperature rise marches that much with CO2 increase even if there is ANY correlation between CO2 and temperature.

I was giving him the benefit of the doubt.

 

[Chris]

Math lesson:

CO2 is less than 1% of the atmosphere (been away from this for so long I forgot already). We are increasing it by 30% ... so that's a .3% change (at best) in the atmosphere. Which means only a .3% change in the temperature for our contribution ... seriously? You're worried about that?

I think that math may be off.

It would be a .3% change in temperature ONLY if there was a 1:1 correlation between CO2 increase and temperature increase. I doubt temperature rise marches that much with CO2 increase even if there is ANY correlation between CO2 and temperature.

The boys at MIT disagree with you.

Climate change odds much worse than thought - MIT News Office

 

[Oddball]

Math lesson:

CO2 is less than 1% of the atmosphere (been away from this for so long I forgot already). We are increasing it by 30% ... so that's a .3% change (at best) in the atmosphere. Which means only a .3% change in the temperature for our contribution ... seriously? You're worried about that?

Even less.

CO2 is approximately 0.03% .....That's THREE ONE-HUNDREDTHS of ONE PERCENT.

A 40% increase in that infinitesimal amount is less than a rounding error.

 

[Chris]

Math lesson:

CO2 is less than 1% of the atmosphere (been away from this for so long I forgot already). We are increasing it by 30% ... so that's a .3% change (at best) in the atmosphere. Which means only a .3% change in the temperature for our contribution ... seriously? You're worried about that?

Even less.

CO2 is approximately 0.03% .....That's THREE ONE-HUNDREDTHS of ONE PERCENT.

A 40% increase in that infinitesimal amount is less than a rounding error.

But CO2's effect is well know and can be defined.

Do you really think you are smarter than the scientists at MIT?

Climate change odds much worse than thought - MIT News Office

 

[Oddball]

Funny how you keep ignoring the MIT scientists who've subsequently said that's all bullshit, you brain dead communist lemming.

No, it's not funny...It's pathetic.

 

[Intense]

Math lesson:

CO2 is less than 1% of the atmosphere (been away from this for so long I forgot already). We are increasing it by 30% ... so that's a .3% change (at best) in the atmosphere. Which means only a .3% change in the temperature for our contribution ... seriously? You're worried about that?

Even less.

CO2 is approximately 0.03% .....That's THREE ONE-HUNDREDTHS of ONE PERCENT.

A 40% increase in that infinitesimal amount is less than a rounding error.

But CO2's effect is well know and can be defined.

Do you really think you are smarter than the scientists at MIT?

Climate change odds much worse than thought - MIT News Office

I Think that God is.

 

[Chris]

Even less.

CO2 is approximately 0.03% .....That's THREE ONE-HUNDREDTHS of ONE PERCENT.

A 40% increase in that infinitesimal amount is less than a rounding error.

But CO2's effect is well know and can be defined.

Do you really think you are smarter than the scientists at MIT?

Climate change odds much worse than thought - MIT News Office

I Think that God is.

I agree.

And God has defined the effect of CO2 on the earth when he created the Universe.

And the boys at MIT can calculate that effect using computers.

Thanks for agreeing with me!

 

[Intense]

Do the boy's at MIT have an accurate weather forecast for 21 days from today? How about 14 Days from now? How about 7 days from now? .......Thought so. How come the didn't back up the evacuation requests for Katrina? Where were they on the Tsunami? What is their contribution to Flood Control on the Mississippi River? If They told you that we needed to start drilling tomorrow off of Florida, along with the Cubans, Mexicans, and the Chinese, would you support them? If they told you that the only solution to global warming was mass graves, would you even blink? Would you hesitate? How are we on aspirin this week? Alcohol? Too much red meat? Not enough red meat? Reverse Osmosis Water? Distilled water? Maybe after Obama confiscates Hawaii, We'll find that we all need to eat more pineapple?

 

[KittenKoder]

Math lesson:

CO2 is less than 1% of the atmosphere (been away from this for so long I forgot already). We are increasing it by 30% ... so that's a .3% change (at best) in the atmosphere. Which means only a .3% change in the temperature for our contribution ... seriously? You're worried about that?

Even less.

CO2 is approximately 0.03% .....That's THREE ONE-HUNDREDTHS of ONE PERCENT.

A 40% increase in that infinitesimal amount is less than a rounding error.

Didn't I say I forgot the numbers?

 

[KittenKoder]

Hell, meteorology is the only science you can be wrong 90% of the time and still be right.

 

[Chris]

Climate change is happening everywhere, but nowhere faster than in the Arctic, where annual temperatures in the far North are warming twice as fast as the rest of the globe. Sea ice on the polar cap is shrinking and permafrost is melting, putting animals like the polar bear — and the Arctic people who depend on them — in increasing danger.

While there's no doubt that the Arctic is warming — year after year, it becomes more clearly visible — it is actually a new phenomenon. In a new study published in the Sept. 4 Science, researchers led by Darrell Kaufman at Northern Arizona University and the National Center for Atmospheric Research constructed a climate record of the Arctic over the past 2,000 years, and found that the region had been cooling for almost all of that time period. Summer temperatures in the Arctic cooled by an average of 0.2 degrees C each thousand years, thanks chiefly to wobbles in the Earth's orbit around the sun that gradually reduced the amount of sunlight hitting the Arctic. Left unchecked, the Arctic would have continued that slow cooling for thousands of more years, until the Earth's orbit wobbled again.

But then something else happened — us. The Science researchers found that during the 20th century, as human beings began pouring greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, the Arctic stopped cooling and started warming. Even though the Arctic is still gradually getting less sunlight, it's still getting hotter — summer temperatures in the Arctic are 1.4 degrees C higher than they would have been if the cooling had continued unabated, according to the study. The most recent decade recorded — from 1999 to 2008 — was the warmest of the past 2,000 years. The recent warming trend has been so strong that researchers say it might have even kept the Earth from slipping into a new Ice Age — although now, of course, the world needs to deal with the opposite problem.

Another study released this week by the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) examines that problem and its potential future effects — and it's not pretty. The WWF researchers found that Arctic sea ice is melting at a faster rate than expected, and that the massive land sheets in Greenland and parts of Antarctic are vulnerable. The report predicts that global sea level will rise more than 3 ft. by 2100, significantly higher than scientists had previously believed. "What we're finding is truly sobering," says Martin Sommerkorn, the senior adviser for the WWF's Arctic Program.

The study also found that the methane locked in Arctic permafrost is increasingly at risk of being released if warming continues — a positive feedback cycle that would accelerate climate change.

Studies of the Arctic Suggest a Dire Situation - TIME

 

[KittenKoder]

I'm tired of taking this seriously, since you avoid all evidence that contradicts your closed mind:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzSzItt6h-s]YouTube - The Great Global Warming Swindle - Produced by WAGTV[/ame]

 

[DiveCon]

Climate change is happening everywhere, but nowhere faster than in the Arctic, where annual temperatures in the far North are warming twice as fast as the rest of the globe. Sea ice on the polar cap is shrinking and permafrost is melting, putting animals like the polar bear — and the Arctic people who depend on them — in increasing danger.

While there's no doubt that the Arctic is warming — year after year, it becomes more clearly visible — it is actually a new phenomenon. In a new study published in the Sept. 4 Science, researchers led by Darrell Kaufman at Northern Arizona University and the National Center for Atmospheric Research constructed a climate record of the Arctic over the past 2,000 years, and found that the region had been cooling for almost all of that time period. Summer temperatures in the Arctic cooled by an average of 0.2 degrees C each thousand years, thanks chiefly to wobbles in the Earth's orbit around the sun that gradually reduced the amount of sunlight hitting the Arctic. Left unchecked, the Arctic would have continued that slow cooling for thousands of more years, until the Earth's orbit wobbled again.

But then something else happened — us. The Science researchers found that during the 20th century, as human beings began pouring greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, the Arctic stopped cooling and started warming. Even though the Arctic is still gradually getting less sunlight, it's still getting hotter — summer temperatures in the Arctic are 1.4 degrees C higher than they would have been if the cooling had continued unabated, according to the study. The most recent decade recorded — from 1999 to 2008 — was the warmest of the past 2,000 years. The recent warming trend has been so strong that researchers say it might have even kept the Earth from slipping into a new Ice Age — although now, of course, the world needs to deal with the opposite problem.

Another study released this week by the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) examines that problem and its potential future effects — and it's not pretty. The WWF researchers found that Arctic sea ice is melting at a faster rate than expected, and that the massive land sheets in Greenland and parts of Antarctic are vulnerable. The report predicts that global sea level will rise more than 3 ft. by 2100, significantly higher than scientists had previously believed. "What we're finding is truly sobering," says Martin Sommerkorn, the senior adviser for the WWF's Arctic Program.

The study also found that the methane locked in Arctic permafrost is increasingly at risk of being released if warming continues — a positive feedback cycle that would accelerate climate change.

Studies of the Arctic Suggest a Dire Situation - TIME

so, its not "global" warming now, its "arctic" warming


only morons can make this shit up

 

[KittenKoder]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhtITYmL9a0]YouTube - South Park Parody of "The Happening"[/ame]

 

[Chris]

When “The Great Global Warming Swindle” aired on British television last year, it was billed by its producers, Wag TV, as “the definitive response to Al Gore’s ‘An Inconvenient Truth.’” In what is arguably the film’s most jarring line, the narrator says: “Everywhere you are told that man-made climate change is proved beyond doubt. But you are being told lies.”

Several hundred viewers, including dozens of scientists, filed complaints about the film’s accuracy, impartiality and fairness with Britain’s Office of Communications, or Ofcom, which among many duties monitors standards for programming. The office’s findings on the climate documentary were released Monday, and I have a story in Science Times on the mixed result. I’ve posted excerpts from the story below, along with links to the report.

Many leading scientists, including Martin Rees of the Royal Society, have criticized the film and the results of the inquiry. Robert Watson, a former chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, one of the film’s main targets, strongly attacked the TV office today, saying, “The public has been swindled,” in an op-ed in the Guardian. [UPDATE 7/23:] Roger Pielke Jr. of the University of Colorado has posted a useful perspective on the film and free speech. If you’ve seen it, what’s your view?
Many of the scientists in the film also attended the Heartland Institute conference of climate skeptics. In both the film and at the meeting, they displayed widely varied views on the causes of climate change but with one common thread: that any human influence, if it exists, is inconsequential.

The telecommunications office mildly rebuked Channel 4, the station that first broadcast the film, for “unfair treatment” of several scientists and the intergovernmental climate panel.
Regulators: ‘Swindle’ Climate Film Unfair but Not Harmful - Dot Earth Blog - NYTimes.com

 

[Chris]

WAGTV and South Park vs the scientists at MIT.

That's KittenKoder in a nutshell.

 

[KittenKoder]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9wmczxnT3c]YouTube - Al Gore Im Serial![/ame]

 

[KittenKoder]

Chris likes fishsticks like Kanye

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDlwwKikOUI]YouTube - South park-Fish sticks video kanye west[/ame]

 

[KittenKoder]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HHVxjMT1-os]YouTube - Al Gore Doll (The Simpsons)[/ame]

 

[Chris]

Since 2001, 32 national science academies have come together to issue joint declarations confirming anthropogenic global warming, and urging the nations of the world to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases. The signatories of these statements have been the national science academies of Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Cameroon, Canada, the Caribbean, China, France, Ghana, Germany, Indonesia, Ireland, Italy, India, Japan, Kenya, Madagascar, Malaysia, Mexico, Nigeria, New Zealand, Russia, Senegal, South Africa, Sudan, Sweden, Tanzania, Uganda, United Kingdom, United States, Zambia, and Zimbabwe.