Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Facebook | Twitter | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 
Latest Post:
Started By:
Rank:
Category
151 days ago.
by slinky
harryanderson
#1

Thankfully, the anti-science propaganda campaign surrounding man-made climate change seems to have lost some of its effect.

Are you seeing storm clouds on the horizon? Two recent studies suggest that the latest anti-science campaign is following its forerunners--the propaganda campaigns attempting to refute science that tobacco causes cancer, that CFC's caused the hole in the ozone layer, and so on—into oblivion. Global warming denial seems to have climbed to a peak in 2010, and global warming acceptance is now climbing. This bodes well for rational public policy.

 
 

Member Comments

harryanderson

When discussing what climate is normal , it’s useful to consider the past record. A study this year found “Surface temperature reconstructions of the past 1500 years suggest that recent warming is unprecedented in that time.”

****sciencemag.or g/content/339/6124/1198.abstract So, if the warming is unprecedented over the last 1500 years, it’s safe to say the recent warming isn’t “normal.” Since the climate is warming at an abnormal pace, we should be thinking of how we’re going to adapt to it.

Posted 980 days ago.

Kendall78

I'm too much of a redhead to ever consider too warm as good ;)

Posted 980 days ago.

Kendall78

If by "warm" you include such things as the depleted ozone layer...I will disagree it is good.

Posted 980 days ago.

harryanderson

As to the suggestion that there is no proof rising CO2 levels are warming the earth.

The over 600 scientists who contributed to the IPCC 5th assessment disagree. The assessment concluded that the human influence on global warming is

“unequivocal.”

Posted 980 days ago.

Kendall78

Normal is based on averages. As the graphs in this article shows, the last few decades have been anything but on average and therefor not normal. (h t t p://w w w.vancouverobserver.c o m/blogs/climatesnapshot/we-just-experienced-4000-years-global-warming-two-decades)

Posted 980 days ago.

harryanderson

As to the suggestion that the climate models have all failed.

Gavin Schmidt of NASA, who provided a usable explanation of climate modeling, says they haven’t failed. He concluded:

“Climate models are unmatched in their ability to quantify otherwise qualitative hypotheses and generate new ideas that can be tested against observations. The models are far from perfect, but they have successfully captured fundamental aspects of air, ocean, and sea-ice circulations and their variability. They are therefore useful tools for estimating the consequences of humankind's ongoing and audacious planetary experiment.”

ww w.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/schmidt_04/

Posted 980 days ago.

Kendall78

I do not ignore failed predictions. However, unlike some people...I do not ignore the overall fact that the Earth's overall temp is rising faster than it should under normal circumstances.

Just because the predictions were not spot on, the important fact to glean from the research is that the Earth's overall temp is rising and it is having an effect upon the overall climate.

It comes down to this..the world is getting warmer. It's either due to mankind's added influence to an already unstable climate system or....what? Nature just up and decided to speed up warming with no evidence to why.

Posted 980 days ago.

Kendall78

When it comes to Climate Change, I try to ignore the politics of it all and try to focus on the science.

And science has shown that there is more to climate than weather. The Gulf Steam is a prime example. It brings warm water up to N. Europe. But as ice disappears in the arctic, the flow of water move further north and Europe won't get as much of the warmer waters. This will have a profound effect on the continent. "Snowball Earth" is an example of what could happen if the climate changes enough in the wrong ways.

Posted 980 days ago.

Kendall78

Yes...over time but how much time? If mankind does damage to the climate it could take centuries for it to fix itself. But of course, mankind would have to let it fix itself and does that look like it's going to happen in the near future?

"so to say that weather is meaningless to climate is a fools errand."

Then why is it that the climate change deniers seem to ignore super cyclones in the Pacific? Snowstorms in the Middle East? Warmer weather in the Arctic? Seems that they turn a blind eye to weather that doesn't support their views.

Posted 980 days ago.

Kendall78

I wait for the end of the world like any christian.

I'm not trying to save the world at all.

"False facts only make things worse."

You should quit giving out those false facts then.

"We do not control the climate."

Not one person has ever said on here that we did.

"God created the earth and He will end it."

God also created man but a bullet in between the eyes will end it.

Posted 980 days ago.

In all the drastic, but wrong, hurricane predictions that I read, climate change was given as the cause. Now you are trying to weasle out of it.

I am here on our beloved farm enjoying a future of God's choosing. I picture Kendall, puffed up with self importance, waiting for doomsday at Walker. If he can only convince the ignorant to join him in saving the world. False facts only make things worse. We do not control the climate. God created the earth and He will end it.

Posted 980 days ago.

Kendall78

Why would I worry about the respect of those I have no respect for?

Posted 980 days ago.

It appears to me Kendall has dug himself a deep hole of disrespect, and being endorsed by a fake WV republican won't help.

Posted 980 days ago.

harryanderson

'pears to me Kendall is doing well on his own, anyway.

Posted 980 days ago.

Kendall78

"If you cannot control the weather, you cannot control the climate."

Since you seem to need it:

Climate- is a measure of the average pattern of variation in temperature, humidity, atmospheric pressure, wind, precipitation, atmospheric particle count and other meteorological variables in a given region over long periods of time. Climate is different than weather, in that weather only describes the short-term conditions of these variables in a given region.

Weather- is the state of the atmosphere, to the degree that it is hot or cold, wet or dry, calm or stormy, clear or cloudy.

Posted 980 days ago.

Kendall78

"You two enjoy your SKY IS FALLING and only GOVERMENT can save us society meeting"

I never mentioned anything like that. You're reaching.

Posted 980 days ago.

Kendall78

"If you cannot control the weather, you cannot control the climate. Where is the proof that MAN can control his climate?"

Can man control a factory? Yes. Can man control how much pollution goes in the air? Yes. Can man directly control what pollution from those factories do to the climate? No.

If an idiot is playing with a loaded gun and it fires, puts a bullet into his body and kills him...are you going to ask why he didn't control the bullet? No, the obvious response is that when you play with something dangerous such as a gun or a factory dumping tons of pollution in the air you are bound to get uncontrollable results.

Posted 980 days ago.

harryanderson

That's funny.

Tiredofit comes on a thread I originated--which he has sworn to boycott, by the way--and tries to exclude me from the discussion.

No sale.

Posted 980 days ago.

Kendall78

"GLOBAL WARMING IS A FRAUD AND THE PLANET DOES HEAT AND COOL."

No one denies that here. But the discussion on Climate Change is whether mankind, the dominant species on the planet, influences climate change on a global scale. It would be as silly as ignoring the sun in the sky to think humanity doesn't influence climate.

Posted 980 days ago.

Kendall78

Harry, I invite you to our discussion.

Posted 980 days ago.
 
 
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or