Its just about perception, neither theory is right or wrong to people, and until someone proves it thats how its going to stay, no need to be ignorant.Warlord wrote:
For someone to say global warming doesn't exist has no concept of reality.
~ W
That would be a good argument against global warming, if any of it were true.TheEternalPessimist wrote:
The temperature increase isn't proportionate at all.Bertster7 wrote:
Ummm, no. Because the temperature increase (which there has been) has been proportional to the rise on CO2 emissions.TheEternalPessimist wrote:
Massive rise in CO2 and no relative rise in temperature... you fell over there a bit didn't you?
Basically all it shows is that co2 and temperature levels although in the past went up and down at relatively comparable levels they are in fact in no way associated at all, 400% CO2 increase and yet the temperature is what it has and always will be.
I'll point out the important points.
Current CO2 marked at around the 365 mark, current temperate is around the 252 mark.
Go back to the last time temp was around the 252 mark and CO2 was around 260. They have absolutely no correlation between them what so ever. The temperature increase is pretty much precisely as steady too, taking about the same amount of time to peak and then slowly cool back down again each and every time. The temperature scale is showing absolutly no sign of changing from it's standard pattern where as the CO2 scale is wildly different from anything that has been before.
It is not, however. Which makes your argument redundant.
The temperature increase is proportional (I don't know if you understand what proportional means - it doesn't mean the same) according to virtually every graph including the one you have been looking at. Although it is difficult to tell from a graph on that scale. There is an offset, between the carbon emissions and the temperature increase, which is in line with the mainstream CO2 forcing climate change theories. Traditionally CO2 increases have been triggered by increases in temperature. But human impact over recent years has increased CO2 levels by such a degree as to trigger a rise in temperature by itself, rather than as the feedback effect it has usually provided about 800 years after the global rise in temperatures (in typical rising temperature cycles of about 5000 years, where CO2 has been the major factor for about 4200 years.).
You can find information about this phenomena here.
The only reason you can't see the temperature changes for being as dramatic as they are on that graph is because of the scale. Smaller scale graphs, such as the much maligned (by idiots who can't do their calculations right - Stephen McIntyre and Ross McKitrick) Mann, Bradley and Hughes Hockey Stick graph give a more accurate portrayal for post industrial era effects of CO2, which are undeniably different from anything seen in observations prior to the industrial era.
It is obvious that global warming is occuring. The anomalous rise in global temeperatures that has occured towards the end of the 20th century cannot be explained without contributions from anthropogenic forcing factors, most specifically from increases in carbon emissions.
As far as the exact details of global glacial cycles, I admit there are some problems with Milankovitch insolation theory, but it is a decent approximation and the best thing we have at present. There are other fairly solid theories concerning the triggers of glacial cycles and all show global warming to traditionally be triggered by external causes, in a very different way to what is happening now. The recent changes show an unpreceedented type of change, with an unpreceedented rate of change to match.
That topic title is ludicrous. There is no 'final step' of global climate change on Earth, short of total annihilation of the planet.colonelioan wrote:
'Did We Just Reached The Final Step Of Global Warming?'
I agree. Climate change is by its very nature cyclic.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
That topic title is ludicrous. There is no 'final step' of global climate change on Earth, short of total annihilation of the planet.colonelioan wrote:
'Did We Just Reached The Final Step Of Global Warming?'
Twenty years from now, perhaps Al Gore will make a new movie with new charts. Maybe then, he'll fall off his podium when he reaches too high.Bertster7 wrote:
I agree. Climate change is by its very nature cyclic.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
That topic title is ludicrous. There is no 'final step' of global climate change on Earth, short of total annihilation of the planet.colonelioan wrote:
'Did We Just Reached The Final Step Of Global Warming?'
Wow, your sad. That is due to deforestation not "global warming". Get your facts straight before you post here agian.Warlord wrote:
Yeah this is perfectly normal ...
http://www.african-safari-journals.com/ … photos.jpg
The top image of Kilimanjaro was taken on February 17, 1993 by the Landsat 5 satellite and the bottom picture seven years later by Landsat 7 on February 21, 2000.
The difference is obvious and alarming. The speed at which the snow is retreating has some scientists predicting that the Africa mountain glacier will disappear completely by the year 2015.
The icecap formed approximately 11,000 years ago and it seems that global warming is going to destroy it in a fraction of that time.
~ W
quite the reviveLiberal-Sl@yer wrote:
Wow, your sad. That is due to deforestation not "global warming". Get your facts straight before you post here agian.Warlord wrote:
Yeah this is perfectly normal ...
http://www.african-safari-journals.com/ … photos.jpg
The top image of Kilimanjaro was taken on February 17, 1993 by the Landsat 5 satellite and the bottom picture seven years later by Landsat 7 on February 21, 2000.
The difference is obvious and alarming. The speed at which the snow is retreating has some scientists predicting that the Africa mountain glacier will disappear completely by the year 2015.
The icecap formed approximately 11,000 years ago and it seems that global warming is going to destroy it in a fraction of that time.
~ W
NecoThreadoPhelia!!!!!
I had a snow day yesterday so me thinks teh snow is staying
I had a snow day yesterday so me thinks teh snow is staying
couldn't help itCommieChipmunk wrote:
quite the reviveLiberal-Sl@yer wrote:
Wow, your sad. That is due to deforestation not "global warming". Get your facts straight before you post here agian.Warlord wrote:
Yeah this is perfectly normal ...
http://www.african-safari-journals.com/ … photos.jpg
The top image of Kilimanjaro was taken on February 17, 1993 by the Landsat 5 satellite and the bottom picture seven years later by Landsat 7 on February 21, 2000.
The difference is obvious and alarming. The speed at which the snow is retreating has some scientists predicting that the Africa mountain glacier will disappear completely by the year 2015.
The icecap formed approximately 11,000 years ago and it seems that global warming is going to destroy it in a fraction of that time.
~ W
props for Canadianism
but im out in toronto we got 18cm of snow and below zero every day
but im out in toronto we got 18cm of snow and below zero every day
Here, in montreal, we got 30cm of snow monday (No school ), and like 5 more cm today. and of course a good ol' -10 degree celcius
I live in the South Island of New Zealand, thats about 45 degrees south, and we had plenty of warm days in winter. Hell, one of them was 21 degrees Celsius!! Last summer it even snowed briefly in december!! (your june as far as seasons go)
You can't tell me somethings not messed up!
You can't tell me somethings not messed up!
It is now 5 minutes to 5pm here. It has been raining non-stop since 9.30am this morning. And its expected to carry on through the night.
Damn monsoon.
Damn monsoon.
We’ve had 2 snow storms in the last 3 days with total accumulation of about a foot of snow with some ice accumulation in between. Cold like always here in WI, about 20 F right now and going to be 6 F tonight. A couple years ago we had some warmer winter days, only to have -20 F later in the same season. Guess global warming already passed for us . . .
Bertster7 wrote:
That would be a good argument against global warming, if any of it were true.TheEternalPessimist wrote:
The temperature increase isn't proportionate at all.Bertster7 wrote:
Ummm, no. Because the temperature increase (which there has been) has been proportional to the rise on CO2 emissions.
I'll point out the important points.
Current CO2 marked at around the 365 mark, current temperate is around the 252 mark.
Go back to the last time temp was around the 252 mark and CO2 was around 260. They have absolutely no correlation between them what so ever. The temperature increase is pretty much precisely as steady too, taking about the same amount of time to peak and then slowly cool back down again each and every time. The temperature scale is showing absolutly no sign of changing from it's standard pattern where as the CO2 scale is wildly different from anything that has been before.
It is not, however. Which makes your argument redundant.
Nice try. Ain't buying
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jh … ook125.xml
The temperature increase is proportional (I don't know if you understand what proportional means - it doesn't mean the same) according to virtually every graph including the one you have been looking at. Although it is difficult to tell from a graph on that scale. There is an offset, between the carbon emissions and the temperature increase, which is in line with the mainstream CO2 forcing climate change theories. Traditionally CO2 increases have been triggered by increases in temperature. But human impact over recent years has increased CO2 levels by such a degree as to trigger a rise in temperature by itself, rather than as the feedback effect it has usually provided about 800 years after the global rise in temperatures (in typical rising temperature cycles of about 5000 years, where CO2 has been the major factor for about 4200 years.).
You can find information about this phenomena here.
The only reason you can't see the temperature changes for being as dramatic as they are on that graph is because of the scale. Smaller scale graphs, such as the much maligned (by idiots who can't do their calculations right - Stephen McIntyre and Ross McKitrick) Mann, Bradley and Hughes Hockey Stick graph give a more accurate portrayal for post industrial era effects of CO2, which are undeniably different from anything seen in observations prior to the industrial era.
It is obvious that global warming is occuring. The anomalous rise in global temeperatures that has occured towards the end of the 20th century cannot be explained without contributions from anthropogenic forcing factors, most specifically from increases in carbon emissions.
As far as the exact details of global glacial cycles, I admit there are some problems with Milankovitch insolation theory, but it is a decent approximation and the best thing we have at present. There are other fairly solid theories concerning the triggers of glacial cycles and all show global warming to traditionally be triggered by external causes, in a very different way to what is happening now. The recent changes show an unpreceedented type of change, with an unpreceedented rate of change to match.
I stood in line for four hours. They better give me a Wal-Mart gift card, or something. - Rodney Booker, Job Fair attendee.
It will get really serious the moment countries start pumping out all the resources beneath the north & south pole.
inane little opines
yes, the sky is falling.