A Citizen’s Guide to Global Warming Evidence

[Si modo]

And still the ice melts, the weather continues to become more erratic, causing foodstocks worldwide to dwindle, and the seas continue to acidify and rise.

But whatever it takes to avoid looking at the reality.

I certainly don't mind you saying that you are concerned about those things. Just don't say it is scientifically shown that CO2 is causing them.

What's been claimed for CO2 that hasn't been proved scientifically? We know that it traps infra-red radiation, so common sense tells you, more CO2 means more trapped energy. We know that CO2 dissolved in water forms carbonic acid, so common sense tells you, more CO2 means lower pHs. If the concentration in the atmosphere has been going up, since the advent of the Industrial Revolution, why shouldn't we consider it a major contributor in what's happening to the climate?

And you still can't see the logical flaw in what you keep saying?

Amazing.

 

[Old Rocks]

And still the temperatures go up, the ice melts, and deniars get stupider every day.

Hmmm, not here in the States. This is one of the coldest and driest winters on record. Temps are dropping everywhere except for the dreamland of GISS, but who knows what Hansen is smoking.

The Baltic froze harder and more extensivley then has been seen in 30 years. Russia was also extremely hard hit. So at least here in the northern hemisphere it has been colder. Seems that they are reporting the same in the southern hemisphere.

No, the only thing that is being revealed is that Mann et all are prevaricators of the first order and are not be going to get a good nights sleep for a while.

CONTIGUOUS UNITED STATES Climate Summary

Yep, that was February. And, worldwide, the analomy for February was -0.02. 2008, with a much weaker La Nina, managed a -0.3. Yet, with a super La Nina, the best we have done so far is -0.02. And March looks like it will be a positive analomy.

Record Events for Fri Mar 25, 2011 through Thu Mar 31, 2011
Total Records: 1668
Rainfall: 367
Snowfall: 211
High Temperatures: 205
Low Temperatures: 167
Lowest Max Temperatures: 606
Highest Min Temperatures: 112
HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View

UAH Temperature Update for Feb. 2011: -0.02 deg. C « Roy Spencer, Ph. D.

 

[Old Rocks]

I certainly don't mind you saying that you are concerned about those things. Just don't say it is scientifically shown that CO2 is causing them.

What's been claimed for CO2 that hasn't been proved scientifically? We know that it traps infra-red radiation, so common sense tells you, more CO2 means more trapped energy. We know that CO2 dissolved in water forms carbonic acid, so common sense tells you, more CO2 means lower pHs. If the concentration in the atmosphere has been going up, since the advent of the Industrial Revolution, why shouldn't we consider it a major contributor in what's happening to the climate?

And you still can't see the logical flaw in what you keep saying?

Amazing.

Neither can the largest organization of Physicists in the world.

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

So we are to believe some ananomous poster on a message board proclaiming all these physicists don't know what they are talking about?

Amazing.

 

[Mr Liberty]

Global warming has become all about politics and very little about science anymore.

I think it was always about politics and never about science. Greatest scam ever attempted.

 

[Si modo]

What's been claimed for CO2 that hasn't been proved scientifically? We know that it traps infra-red radiation, so common sense tells you, more CO2 means more trapped energy. We know that CO2 dissolved in water forms carbonic acid, so common sense tells you, more CO2 means lower pHs. If the concentration in the atmosphere has been going up, since the advent of the Industrial Revolution, why shouldn't we consider it a major contributor in what's happening to the climate?

And you still can't see the logical flaw in what you keep saying?

Amazing.

Neither can the largest organization of Physicists in the world.

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

So we are to believe some ananomous poster on a message board proclaiming all these physicists don't know what they are talking about?

Amazing.

Who is arguing that there isn't a greenhouse effect?

If you can't even figure out the point, it's better not to post and confirm your idiocy.

 

[westwall]

And still the ice melts

The ice has been melting for some 14,000 years now. What, exactly do you find unusual, or disturbing about the fact that it is still melting.

Were the ice melting steadily since the deglaciation, the sea level would be much higher than it is at present. As a matter of fact, had the sea levels been rising at the rate they are today, most the seaports in Europe would have been underwater many decades ago. The fact is that the sea level has been fairly stable until recently.
NASA GISS: Science Briefs: Sea Level Rise, After the Ice Melted and Today




Peer reviewed research says that the weather is no more erratic today than it has ever been.

Of course, it may just be a bad luck year, but most Pakistanis and Russians would disagree with you.



We produce more food today than at any other time in history.

Yes, and we have more mouths to feed than at any time in history. And the cost of producing that food, and the recent weather events in Russia, Pakistan, and China has caused a substancial decrease in the food supply we have in store.
http://www.rabobank.com/content/images/Rabobank_IMW_WB_report-FINAL-A4-total_tcm43-127734.pdf



The oceans are alkaline, not acid. In fact, they aren't even close to becoming acidic.

This is just one of many articles on the acidification of the oceans.
What is ocean acidification?



The latest peer reviewed research states that sea level is not rising at an historically unusual rate.

NASA GISS: Science Briefs: Sea Level Rise, After the Ice Melted and Today

Twentieth century sea level trends, however, are substantially higher that those of the last few thousand years. The current phase of accelerated sea level rise appears to have begun in the mid/late 19th century to early 20th century, based on coastal sediments from a number of localities. Twentieth century global sea level, as determined from tide gauges in coastal harbors, has been increasing by 1.7-1.8 mm/yr, apparently related to the recent climatic warming trend. Most of this rise comes from warming of the world's oceans and melting of mountain glaciers, which have receded dramatically in many places especially during the last few decades. Since 1993, an even higher sea level trend of about 2.8 mm/yr has been measured from the TOPEX/POSEIDON satellite altimeter. Analysis of longer tide-gauge records (1870-2004) also suggests a possible late 20th century acceleration in global sea level.

But whatever it takes to avoid looking at the reality.

Clearly, you will do whatever it takes to avoid looking at reality. When you allow your politics to determine the way you look at the world to the point that you are no longer a skilled observer, you are indeed lost.

You did the yap-yap number with zero backup. What reason do we have to believe anything that you have stated? You are just another ananomous poster on a message board. You can claim to be Napoleon if you wish. But for anything that you claim, failure to back it up says that it is baseless yap-yap.

Everything he said is in point of fact backed up by loads of empirical data. Your POV on the other hand is supported only by crappy computer models.

 

[Foxfyre]

There is obviously a lot of interest in this subject since on ALL political message boards, somebody starts a new thread on it every few days.

We're looking for record warm temperatures here in New Mexico over the next several days. That follows on the heels of record setting cold over this past winter. The problem with records of course is that we have been keeping them for such a short time relative to the length of time there has been weather on Planet Earth.

The 'record' is only seconds of the many eons of Earth science making it relatively insignificant in the grand scheme of things.

The thing I can't figure out is why some are hanging onto the whole AGW schtick so tenaciously? I mean I know why scientists depending on liberal governments for their funding do. I know why corporate big wigs like General Electric who stand to make billions if the AGW crowd is successful in their agenda do.

But why are our fellow USMB members so gung ho to insist that AGW is real and a threat and a terrible problem?

 

[IanC]

There is obviously a lot of interest in this subject since on ALL political message boards, somebody starts a new thread on it every few days.

We're looking for record warm temperatures here in New Mexico over the next several days. That follows on the heels of record setting cold over this past winter. The problem with records of course is that we have been keeping them for such a short time relative to the length of time there has been weather on Planet Earth.

The 'record' is only seconds of the many eons of Earth science making it relatively insignificant in the grand scheme of things.

The thing I can't figure out is why some are hanging onto the whole AGW schtick so tenaciously? I mean I know why scientists depending on liberal governments for their funding do. I know why corporate big wigs like General Electric who stand to make billions if the AGW crowd is successful in their agenda do.

But why are our fellow USMB members so gung ho to insist that AGW is real and a threat and a terrible problem?

perhaps the biggest reason that so many hold tight to catastrophic AGW is confirmation bias. 10 or 15 years ago the evidence for AGW looked very strong and many people climbed on board. since then the evidence has been evaporating and with better data the trends and forecasts have been scaled back considerably. but it is harder to become less certain of an opinion, a decision to believe, than it is to flip flop and take the opposing position. unfortunately the scientists that sounded the alarm were exaggerating, probably for reasons of 'the greater good'. that is not how science is done and it has caused a lot of harm to both the science and the people who want to hold them in thrall as authority figures.

 

[Old Rocks]

LOL. Ian, you are a hoot. So, over the last ten or fifteen years the evidence has been evaporating? The cryosphere as a whole is melting at a rate not seen in recorded history. We have had 3 or the warmest years in recorded history in that period for which you claim the evidence is evaporating.

In fact, the whole of the data is 180 degrees opposite of your claims, Ian. Even the sceptic, Dr. Spencer, records the rapid increase in warming in the last 10 or 15 years.

 

[Old Rocks]

The ice has been melting for some 14,000 years now. What, exactly do you find unusual, or disturbing about the fact that it is still melting.

Were the ice melting steadily since the deglaciation, the sea level would be much higher than it is at present. As a matter of fact, had the sea levels been rising at the rate they are today, most the seaports in Europe would have been underwater many decades ago. The fact is that the sea level has been fairly stable until recently.
NASA GISS: Science Briefs: Sea Level Rise, After the Ice Melted and Today




Peer reviewed research says that the weather is no more erratic today than it has ever been.

Of course, it may just be a bad luck year, but most Pakistanis and Russians would disagree with you.



We produce more food today than at any other time in history.

Yes, and we have more mouths to feed than at any time in history. And the cost of producing that food, and the recent weather events in Russia, Pakistan, and China has caused a substancial decrease in the food supply we have in store.
http://www.rabobank.com/content/images/Rabobank_IMW_WB_report-FINAL-A4-total_tcm43-127734.pdf



The oceans are alkaline, not acid. In fact, they aren't even close to becoming acidic.

This is just one of many articles on the acidification of the oceans.
What is ocean acidification?



The latest peer reviewed research states that sea level is not rising at an historically unusual rate.

NASA GISS: Science Briefs: Sea Level Rise, After the Ice Melted and Today

Twentieth century sea level trends, however, are substantially higher that those of the last few thousand years. The current phase of accelerated sea level rise appears to have begun in the mid/late 19th century to early 20th century, based on coastal sediments from a number of localities. Twentieth century global sea level, as determined from tide gauges in coastal harbors, has been increasing by 1.7-1.8 mm/yr, apparently related to the recent climatic warming trend. Most of this rise comes from warming of the world's oceans and melting of mountain glaciers, which have receded dramatically in many places especially during the last few decades. Since 1993, an even higher sea level trend of about 2.8 mm/yr has been measured from the TOPEX/POSEIDON satellite altimeter. Analysis of longer tide-gauge records (1870-2004) also suggests a possible late 20th century acceleration in global sea level.




Clearly, you will do whatever it takes to avoid looking at reality. When you allow your politics to determine the way you look at the world to the point that you are no longer a skilled observer, you are indeed lost.

You did the yap-yap number with zero backup. What reason do we have to believe anything that you have stated? You are just another ananomous poster on a message board. You can claim to be Napoleon if you wish. But for anything that you claim, failure to back it up says that it is baseless yap-yap.

Everything he said is in point of fact backed up by loads of empirical data. Your POV on the other hand is supported only by crappy computer models.

Ol' Walleyes is once again a hoot!

Crappy computer models are melting the alpine glaciers worldwide? Melting gigatons of ice off of both Greenland and Anarctica at an accelerating rate? Melting the permafrost and releasing vast amounts of CO2 and CH4 into the atmosphere? Warming the oceans as measured by the worldwide array of bouys and gliders? Creating the sea level rise that the satellites are measuring? A rise that is also accelerating.

My goodness, if you didn't have lies, you would have nothing at all, Walleyes

 

[skookerasbil]

Why do you think Al Gore has'nt been seen in months???

Because his shit doesnt resonate when the whole country is frozen solid.

Expect to see him in the next couple of months when we have a heat wave somewhere. Works the same way every year, but especially this past winter as epic snows and bitter cold effected 49 states.




Oh...........and computer models are BS........they cant even predict your normal storm front direction just 24 hours in front of the storm!! But the "real" scientists sell these hoax computer models that see the future 50 years hence...............


OK..........................

 

[skookerasbil]

typical Saturday on the ENVIRONMENT forum.....................

 

[westwall]

LOL. Ian, you are a hoot. So, over the last ten or fifteen years the evidence has been evaporating? The cryosphere as a whole is melting at a rate not seen in recorded history. We have had 3 or the warmest years in recorded history in that period for which you claim the evidence is evaporating.

In fact, the whole of the data is 180 degrees opposite of your claims, Ian. Even the sceptic, Dr. Spencer, records the rapid increase in warming in the last 10 or 15 years.

I think you need to check your figures olfraud...

COI | Centre for Ocean and Ice | Danmarks Meteorologiske Institut

 

[Foxfyre]

Why do you think Al Gore has'nt been seen in months???

Because his shit doesnt resonate when the whole country is frozen solid.

Expect to see him in the next couple of months when we have a heat wave somewhere. Works the same way every year, but especially this past winter as epic snows and bitter cold effected 49 states.




Oh...........and computer models are BS........they cant even predict your normal storm front direction just 24 hours in front of the storm!! But the "real" scientists sell these hoax computer models that see the future 50 years hence...............


OK..........................

That's one thing our AGW proponents don't really like to talk about. Those computer models they put so much faith in so far haven't been able to use known data that we have over the last couple of hundred years or so and get those models to come up with the climate/weather we have now. But we are supposed to believe they know what the climate/weather will be 50 to 100 years from now? That takes more faith than I have.

 

[westwall]

You did the yap-yap number with zero backup. What reason do we have to believe anything that you have stated? You are just another ananomous poster on a message board. You can claim to be Napoleon if you wish. But for anything that you claim, failure to back it up says that it is baseless yap-yap.

Everything he said is in point of fact backed up by loads of empirical data. Your POV on the other hand is supported only by crappy computer models.

Ol' Walleyes is once again a hoot!

Crappy computer models are melting the alpine glaciers worldwide? Melting gigatons of ice off of both Greenland and Anarctica at an accelerating rate? Melting the permafrost and releasing vast amounts of CO2 and CH4 into the atmosphere? Warming the oceans as measured by the worldwide array of bouys and gliders? Creating the sea level rise that the satellites are measuring? A rise that is also accelerating.

My goodness, if you didn't have lies, you would have nothing at all, Walleyes

Here are some wiki sites plus a couple of others that show that both in the northern and southern hemispheres glaciers are advancing which refute your statement.

Whitney Glacier - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Bolam Glacier - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hotlum Glacier - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Argentine glacier grows despite warming - US news - Environment - Climate Change - msnbc.com

Contrarian New Zealand Glaciers Grow In The Age Of Global Warming

 

[Ernie S.]

This behavior is equivalent to the Tokyo scientist who solicits his government for a Godzilla-studies grant because of the havoc the old nuclear fire breather could cause if he were real.

My observations expressed more eloquently than I have ever been capable.

 

[Si modo]

Why do you think Al Gore has'nt been seen in months???

Because his shit doesnt resonate when the whole country is frozen solid.

Expect to see him in the next couple of months when we have a heat wave somewhere. Works the same way every year, but especially this past winter as epic snows and bitter cold effected 49 states.




Oh...........and computer models are BS........they cant even predict your normal storm front direction just 24 hours in front of the storm!! But the "real" scientists sell these hoax computer models that see the future 50 years hence...............


OK..........................

That's one thing our AGW proponents don't really like to talk about. Those computer models they put so much faith in so far haven't been able to use known data that we have over the last couple of hundred years or so and get those models to come up with the climate/weather we have now. But we are supposed to believe they know what the climate/weather will be 50 to 100 years from now? That takes more faith than I have.

Not only that but there exists exactly zero data sets where the model (the IPCC models) predicts anything but doom.

The models are nonfalsifiable, thus they are nonscientific.

Those who play at science must think the models are scientific. It's pretty cringeworthy.

 

[asterism]

I don't need some "scholar" to see it. I watched 100 acres of coffee get ripped out and replanted 1000 feet higher because coffee now has issues at the elevations it was grown in for the past couple hundred years.
I know. murkins like to talk about all the snow in JewJoizzy because it's all they're told.

And I've seen citrus operations forced to migrate further south because on average winters are harsher here than they were 30 years ago. If we're getting warmer overall, why are the oranges freezing now when they didn't before?

 

[asterism]

And still the ice melts, the weather continues to become more erratic, causing foodstocks worldwide to dwindle, and the seas continue to acidify and rise.

But whatever it takes to avoid looking at the reality.

I certainly don't mind you saying that you are concerned about those things. Just don't say it is scientifically shown that CO2 is causing them.

What's been claimed for CO2 that hasn't been proved scientifically? We know that it traps infra-red radiation, so common sense tells you, more CO2 means more trapped energy. We know that CO2 dissolved in water forms carbonic acid, so common sense tells you, more CO2 means lower pHs. If the concentration in the atmosphere has been going up, since the advent of the Industrial Revolution, why shouldn't we consider it a major contributor in what's happening to the climate?

Because you need to prove the actual correlation. I remember the models from 10 years ago saying that we'd be at 5 degrees Celsius above then current mean temperatures. 5 degrees worldwide. What's the actual rise?

 

[asterism]

I don't need some "scholar" to see it. I watched 100 acres of coffee get ripped out and replanted 1000 feet higher because coffee now has issues at the elevations it was grown in for the past couple hundred years.
I know. murkins like to talk about all the snow in JewJoizzy because it's all they're told.

Probably has more to do with soil depletion but then that would be science.

Some people looking forward forget old concepts like crop rotation.