GSA, AGU meetings.

[Si modo]

Will they be covering both sides of the issue?

I'd be interested in reading/hearing some debates.

There is no debate concerning the fact that GHGs warm the atmosphere. There is no debate that the atmosphere and oceans are warming. There is no debate concerning the fact that the CO2 level has risen about 40% in the last 150 years, from 280 ppm to about 390 ppm. That is higher than it has been in something like 15 million years. The CH4 level has risen from about 700 ppb to about 1800 ppb.

For more information concerning the realities, here are some sites from scientific sources.

A23A

C24A

H22A

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

Hey, Dodge. Glad to see you posted these links yet again.

Tell me, what do you think they say?

Eh, Dodge? What are they saying?

I've asked you several times before and haven't received an answer, let's see if you still dodge the question.

 

[fyrenza]

A23A

I've only listened to this first lecture, so far,

and even though I went into this being extremely skeptical,

I can't find any huge faults with the methodology.

What Alley is saying is that CO2 levels are intricately intertwined with the temperatures, and that there IS a valid scientific correlation between the two.

I found it interesting that at the end, when Alley takes questions? He doesn't side-step ANY of them, nor hem-and-haw around in his answers.

Another point I appreciated was Alley's deference to and remarks on the fact that None of this THEORY is "carved in stone" ~ there ARE other considerations, the investigating scientists ARE aware of them, and everything possible is being done to incorporate them into the mix. Right NOW, THIS is what they have to work with, but that's not to say that tomorrow, they won't have MORE valid models and information to work with.

For all that Alley looks like a goof-ball, and sounds like a SCREECHer, he presents an excellent case.

He mentions that there are those who would run him out of town on a rail over this, and I'd be interested to hear what they have to say, also.

 

[Old Rocks]

I would also like to hear what they have to say. Unfortunately, they seem unable to present a coherant position in a scientific setting.

The other lectures are of similiar character, presenting what their evidence and conclusions. Not stating that what they are saying is 'truth' but rather conclusions logically drawn from the present evidence.