My belief in Global Warming is getting shaky

[CraigD]

Originally Posted by engineerdude

CraigD, when you ran your correlation, why did you omit the most recent data? What is actually happening right now is the best data we have - we know more precisely than ever very exact levels of CO2 and temperature.

I used all of the data published in the source I cited in post #970, ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/pal.../domec_co2.txt and ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/pal...uttemp2007.txt (Valérie Masson-Delmotte). These data don’t include CO2 values after 1515 AD, or before 9003 BC.

Engineerdude, please provide the URLs for the data you used to make the chart in post #964, or, if not available via a URL, upload them as attachments.

Note, however, that a correctly generated correlation coefficient must sample evenly over the two datasets’ shared variable – in this case, date, so many datapoints from a short interval, such as CO2 concentration and temperatures since 1960, will have less effect than a few datapoints from a long interval, such as the 5 data from dc_co2_hol_fl02.txt for 7982 BC to 7118 BC.

[goku]

Originally Posted by REASON

Evolutionists? We're talking climatology here, goku. Get with the program.

Are you here to tell us that what the top climate scientists in the world have missed all along is the humidity? Maybe you'd be willing, with all of your advanced down-home knowledge, to explain the way in which water vapor is causing a rapid and steady increase in the mean global temperature instead of just saying CO2 can't be a factor.

yes evolutionists global warmers, they are all equally stupid. for lack of better word.

so your saying there is a detailed and complete weather history that goes back to the begining, of earth? rapid increase that's good stuff
how much has it increased?
when did it start increasing?

and sense the earth is EVOLVING it would be un-natural for humans to interfere with EVOLUTION.

[Qfwfq]

Originally Posted by goku

...it would be un-natural for humans to interfere with EVOLUTION.

Great reason to waste less energy and burn less fuel.

[REASON]

To be honest, I hesitated to dignify your trollesque post with a reply, goku, but......whatever.

Originally Posted by goku

yes evolutionists global warmers, they are all equally stupid. for lack of better word.

I think you should seriously reflect on this statement.

This is not a good way to represent your cause - whatever it is.

Originally Posted by goku

so your saying there is a detailed and complete weather history that goes back to the begining, of earth?

No. No one has said that. Not once, at all, at any point in this discussion, ever.

Originally Posted by goku

rapid increase that's good stuff
how much has it increased?
when did it start increasing?

There have been nearly a thousand posts made to this thread, many of which have included detailed graphs and links to an enormous amount of research and information examining global warming trends and anomalies as they exist currently, and in the past, as well as models that attempt to make predictions for the future.

You have popped in on occasion to toss in your two cents worth of snide comments and criticism, each time making it more obvious that you have not even read or considered the information that has been provided. If you had, you wouldn't have asked the questions above. They have already been discussed many times, in many ways, and backed-up with legitimate scientific research.

If you are unwilling look at it, then I'm unwilling to reiterate it.

Originally Posted by goku

and sense the earth is EVOLVING it would be un-natural for humans to interfere with EVOLUTION.

Humans are part of the Earth, and are continually participating in the evolution of life on this planet. It is unavoidable. In the animal kingdom, we are unique in our ability to shape, control, and affect the environment. Our goal should be to learn to control that ability by working in harmony with nature so that we avoid damaging not only other forms of life, but avoid damaging ourselves.

Either way, evolution will run it's course.

[goku]

Originally Posted by REASON

You have popped in on occasion to toss in your two cents worth of snide comments and criticism, each time making it more obvious that you have not even read or considered the information that has been provided. If you had, you wouldn't have asked the questions above. They have already been discussed many times, in many ways, and backed-up with legitimate scientific research.

Humans are part of the Earth, and are continually participating in the evolution of life on this planet. It is unavoidable. In the animal kingdom, we are unique in our ability to shape, control, and affect the environment. Our goal should be to learn to control that ability by working in harmony with nature so that we avoid damaging not only other forms of life, but avoid damaging ourselves.

i do appologize for what i said, there's no excuse.

your right i haven't carefully looked at any of the graphs, because they don't matter. the planet is changing, always. there are no rules saying planet earth should be this in X many years. where's the owner's mannuel?

why should we control that ability?
where does it say humans are suposed to do this?
evolution doesn't say that.

what really upsets me is seeing the people you trust to do something about global warming take your money and do absolutely nothing.

[Michaelangelica]

Anti-global warming comments political, not scientific

November 18, 2008


William Gray (Soapbox, Nov. 6) states: “Most people are not aware of how flimsy are the physical arguments behind the human-induced warming scenario.”
Advertisement

He may come with the label “scientist,” but his arguments are all political, eschewing the scientific method. He “conveniently” ignores the scientific studies demonstrating human responsibility (1), like the ice core samples from Greenland that go back some 400,000 years showing an approximately 100,000-year recurring natural cycle of CO2 concentration topping out at around 280 ppm, while our current concentration is at 380 ppm and continuing to climb rapidly (2).

He tells us computer models are not perfect at reproducing precipitation events, so their predictions can safely be ignored. What he fails to convey are the facts of global environment transformation: ice at the poles is melting far faster than the models predicted; (3) the unfreezing of the arctic permafrost is releasing vast amounts of formerly trapped methane gas (4) (methane is a greenhouse gas 27 times more powerful than CO2); the Greenland ice sheet is melting at a much faster rate than predicted. Computer modeling may not be 100 percent correct, but it does not follow that we can safely ignore their warnings.

He resorts to the conservative propagandist’s ploy of pitting “the economy” against “green energy.” This conveniently ignores the societal — and very real financial — costs of continuing to destroy the environ-ment we all depend upon for our very existence. True scientists . . .

Anti-global warming comments political, not scientific | coloradoan.com | The Coloradoan,

[goku]

what if we filled our atics with CO2 instead of fiberglass?

[Zythryn]

Goku, I don't believe that was a serious question, was it?

[CraigD]

Originally Posted by goku

what if we filled our atics with CO2 instead of fiberglass?

I’m guessing goku’s speculating that, because CO2 and other greenhouse gasses are believed to increase the average temperature of the Earth’s, filling a house attic with greenhouse gasses would increase the temperature of the air in the house.

The flaw with this idea is that the greenhouse effect results from material – greenhouse gasses in the case of an atmosphere, glass or other transparent sheet material in a greenhouse, etc. – allowing visible sunlight to pass through it, but absorbing and reemitting or reflecting the infrared light emitted by the sunlit surfaces below. Since the roof of the usual house is opaque to light well above and below the visible range, the greenhouse effect doesn’t play much of a role with it, regardless of what kind of gasses fill its attic.

The purpose of attic insulation is preventing heat escaping the house by heating the roof. Fiberglass blanket insulation is good at this, because it contains many small cells that limits the ability of the gas it contains to transport heat via convection. Though heavier gasses could be used to make slightly more effective insulation, unless encased in a gas-tight envelope (which would make the blanket troublesome to cut), they’d escape the fiberglass mat and be replaced with ordinary air, so it’s easier and cheaper to just increase the thickness of the blanket.

If you did have a transparent roofed house, the transparent material itself would likely be a more effective infrared reflector than any greenhouse gas-rich gas with which you could fill a gas-tight attic, so there’d be no point in using a gas other than ordinary air. Keeping such a house warm at night could be tricky – using multiple sheets of transparent material with gas baffles between them might work. Keeping the house from getting too hot during the day would be a challenge.

[Larv]

Originally Posted by engineerdude

...The earth is a complex system - maybe in a thousand years we can do math to predict the weather, but not now. I need some basic, easy to understand evidence. Please don't link me a webpage with one side's propoganda - I need some ammo here, as in "The last ice age was caused because there were too many plants which took all the Co2 out of the air, look at this data".

So, what am I missing?

Hi engineerdude,

I have some evidence for you to consider. It's all about what happens to the oceans when their supply of atmospheric CO2 increases substantially:

1. Pacific Coast Lines Turn Acidic - Carbon dioxide increases oceanic water acidity

2. Acidic seas threaten coral and mussels

3. Puget Sound orcas down to 86

The last one has been explained by the declining salmon populations, which have dwindled in recent years, owing to overfishing, of course, but also to the shocking rise of oceanic acidity. It's ten times higher than it's suppose to be. It's altering marine habitats. And it's definitely connected to global warming.

—Larv