Global Warming

Could it be argued that Hippies started global warming?
I like hippies don't get me wrong. But I was thinking they where very adamant in there mission to stop nuclear power. But today if they wouldn't of done it we would not be as dependent on fossil fuels and we would be more nuclear powered. I am just asking is it a valid argument?

What do you think the world would be like if ruined by global warming?
whats your opinion on this? what picture comes to mind?what do YOU think? what comes to mind? describe it...

What ways can we do to reduce global warming and support the environment?


What other important stuff do we have to look after so we all are safe? apart from global warming?


What are some good things about global warming?
what happens that is good or helps out the environment or the society.

How will forests be impacted by global warming and climate change?
A major new study by 19 researchers around the world published in Forest Ecology and Management concludes as follows." Here we present the first global assessment of recent tree mortality attributed to drought and heat stress. Although episodic mortality occurs in the absence of climate change, studies compiled here suggest that at least some of the world's forested ecosystems already may be responding to climate change and raise concern that forests may become increasingly vulnerable to higher background tree mortality rates and die off in response to future warming and drought, even in environments that are not normally considered water limited. This further suggests risks to ecosystem services, including the loss of sequestered forest carbon and associated atmospheric feedbacks...Overall, our review reveals the potential for amplified tree mortality due to drought and heat in forests worldwide." sciencedirect.com science? ob ArticleURL& udi B6T6X 4XH566S 1& user 10& coverDate 02 %2F05 %2F2010& alid 1252205844& rdoc 1& fmt high& orig search& cdi 5042& sort r& docanchor & view c& ct 2& acct C000050221& version 1& urlVersion 0& userid 10& md5 0fe91c4119649f68313430fd7fd1145fWhat are your thoughts how will forests be impacted by global warming and climate change?" it took about one sentence to conclude that the article is more about propaganda than science." A perfect example of denial." When 19 people co author a study, that is not a study but a political statement." I'm sorry eric, that is a frigging stupid thing to say.

How is this global warming any different from the rate we have experienced for the last 11,000 years?
From the ice core record the warming looks within normal parameters and it has been much warmer and colder in the recent past when there were no factories, cars or many humans around?en.wikipedia.org wiki File 0Master Past 20000yrs temperatures icecore Vostok 150dpi.png

When was global warming brought to attention?
I know that global warming started after the ice age, but when did people really talk about it and tried solving this issue?

How do you think global warming changed in the last 20-30 has it got worse or better?


McLean and Carter et al. ENSO paper officially debunked - is the ENSO global warming theory now dead?
You may recall that last year there was some noise in the blogosphere about McLean et al. one of the co authors was Bob Carter, Australian marine geologist well known for his global warming 'skepticism' study which concluded that the El Nino Southern Oscillation ENSO might be responsible for some of the recent global warming. The paper created a hubub because although they snuck this conclusion into the paper, it was not supported by their research. It was a conclusion which shouldn't have made it through the peer review process. Nevertheless, at the time, various denier blogs trumpeted the study as 'proof' that the current global warming is natural.After apparently sitting on the journal editor's desk for 6 months first they do a shoddy peer review process, then they take over 6 months to publish a correcting study AGU needs to work on their standards for the GRL journal , a paper discussing and correcting McLean et al. has finally been published. Normally a reply from the original authors would be published, but apparently McLean et al. couldn't come up with a publishable response their attempt at one was rejected .The correcting paper pointed out the glaring errors in McLean et al. As one of the authors summarized," The primary error of McLean et al is that although they filter out all long term changes, they still claim that the resulting high correlation between SOI Southern Oscillation Index and global mean temperature in the filtered series has relevance for long term trends. As shown in the toy examples in the comment, this is simply not true the correlations calculated by their analysis method are completely unrelated to any long term trends in the underlying data. A secondary error is that they splice together two data sets which have different baselines, which artificially reduces the warming by about 0.2C. A third error is that they claim to identify two flat periods with a breakpoint in the middle for both SOI and temperature , but their statistical analysis provides no support for this." jamstec.go.jp frsgc research d5 jdannan comment on mclean.pdfThe good news is that other than Roy Spencer on occasion, deniers rarely attempt to attribute global warming to ENSO unless you count the 'magical natural cycles' argument . So it seems as though McLean et al. never got a foothold in the denier movement consciousness anyway. Given the lack of popularity of the argument and this debunking paper, is the ENSO global warming theory now dead?

Global warming funder George Soros meets other billionaires to discuss overpopulation?
The Times London reports that George Soros, hedge fund speculator and funder of Climate Progress blog met with David Rockefeller, Ted Turner, Michael Bloomberg and Warren Buffet to discuss quote " how their wealth could be used to slow the growth of the world s population" .The billionaires met at the New York home of British scientist and Nobel prize winner, Paul Nurse, the scientist who was in the news a few years earlier for controversially suggesting that everyone should have their entire genetic code scanned and have to carry " gene ID cards" see BBC article " Warning on gene 'ID cards" news.bbc.co.uk 1 hi health 2816003.stm .The billionaires concluded that overpopulation should be the focus of their efforts, that it should be presented as an environmental threat, and that the response needed to be free of governments and the democratic process QUOTE " Patricia Stonesifer, former chief executive of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which gives more than 2 billion a year to good causes, attended the Rockefeller summit. She said the billionaires met to discuss how to increase giving and they intended to continue the dialogue over the next few months.Another guest said there was nothing as crude as a vote but a consensus emerged that they would back a strategy in which population growth would be tackled as a potentially disastrous environmental, social and industrial threat. This is something so nightmarish that everyone in this group agreed it needs big brain answers, said the guest. They need to be independent of government agencies, which are unable to head off the disaster we all see looming. So, given that hedge fund speculator George Soros, spends so much money promoting global warming, what do you think of his involvement in the billionaires against overpopulation clique?Source timesonline.co.uk tol news world us and americas article6350303.ece< < read the short article especially the classic quote right at the end of it > > ..EDIT Simon C All due respect, what the hell are you talking about? You wrote " " There's no way the world could have prepared for over 5.5 billion more people over just 8 generations." " But that's what mankind HAS done. People now are better fed, better housed, better cared for than at any time in history. Check the UNDP figures if you don't believe me. So what's your point?

Global Warming questions? PLEASE ANSWER?
1. Why might global warming lead to increasing frequency and severity of storms?2. Why might global warming lead to more frequent heat waves and droughts?3. Why might global warming lead to a relocation of crop growing areas?If you could explain your answers that would be great, thanks so much

£8.29 £13.96

Al "the global warming" gore is back now how full of it is he?
looks like he didnt stay low till summer, he claims the daylight savings storm that rocked the North East businessandmedia.org articles 2010 20100316061540.aspx is caused by global warming. how full of it is he?

Will global warming be popular again this summer?

The Year of the Man-made Global Warming Skeptic

In 2008, scientists from all over the world are jumping off the man-made global warmingbandwagon. This is due to the fact that environmental study after study concludes that the behavior of man is not the cause of significant global warming.

In a recently released Geological Society of America abstract, Dr. Don Easterbrook, Professor of Geology at Western Washington University, presented data showing that the global warming cycle from 1977 to 1998 is now over and that we have entered into a new global cooling period that should last for the next three decades.

He also suggests that since the IPCC climate models are now so far off from what is actually happening that their projections for both this decade and century must be considered highly unreliable.

Meanwhile, David Douglass and John Christy, in a paper just accepted for publication and now available on the internet, have come to the conclusion that natural changes in global water temperature are responsible for an increase in global temperature. Here is their scientific conclusion:

"El Nino and La Nina effects in the tropics have a more significant affect on global temperature anomalies than carbon dioxide, in particular it was an El Nino event that drove the 1998 global temperature maximum".

At NASA, Dr. Roy Spencer, believes natural cycles account for most of last century's warming, with carbon dioxide increases contributing only a modest amount.

His new research, which was submitted to Geophysical Research Letters for publication, shows that climate models overstate the positive feedback from an increase in carbon dioxide, and therefore grossly overstate the projected warming during the next century

In addition, two new studies (article in Science Magazine) point to wind-induced circulation changes in the ocean as the dominant cause of the recent ice losses through the glaciers draining both the Greenland and West Antarctic ice sheets, not 'global warming.'

In June, Dr. David Evans, an architect of Australia's Kyoto compliance, and for years a noted climate change alarmist, became the latest man-made global warming doubter. Evans outlines the four main reasons why 2008 has become the year of the global warming skeptic and why he recently jumped off of the global warming bandwagon.

1.The missing "greenhouse signature", which would be a hot zone about 10 km up in the atmosphere. It's been sought for years - hundreds of measurements using radiosondes (a sort of temperature measuring weather balloon). It would constitute the smoking gun . Hundreds of tests have returned the same answer - it's not there. It is statistically impossible that the hundreds of tests missed the spot. The existing models on greenhouse warming do not work without this hot zone.

2. "There is no evidence to support the idea that carbon emissions cause significant global warming" says Evans. "None". There is plenty of evidence that global warming has occurred, and theory suggests that carbon emissions should raise temperatures (though by how much is hotly disputed) but there are no observations" constituting evidence that carbon emissions are a significant driver in warming trends.

3. Satellites measuring the world's temperature uniformly show that the warming trend stopped in 2001 and that in the past year the temperature actually returned to 1980 levels. Satellite measurements are the only truly reliable method for capturing the data as land-based measurements are vulnerable to encroachments of expanding cities and "urban heat island effect."

4."The new ice cores show that in the past six global warmings over the past half a million years, the temperature rises occurred on average 800 years before the accompanying rise in atmospheric carbon. Which says something important about which was cause and which was effect."

As global temperatures continue to cool and research against man-made global warming continues to pile up, as scientists abandon the man-made global warming bandwagon, one thing is becoming increasingly clear. The cause of global climate change should be based on facts and evidence and not just our fear.