If you already knew everything in there then why did you attempt to use this years temperatures and snowfall reports as evidence against global warming?
Originally posted by: Comanche
I read all your links and didn't find anything that I didn't already know.
But the bolded above goes both ways!
Originally posted by: Comanche
Because those people that tell us that MMGW is happening and that we should be scared and do something about it are wrong.
Earth warms -- 1300's
Earth cools -- 1700's
Earth warms -- 1900's
Earth cools -- 1940's
Earth warms -- 1970's
Can't you see a pattern here. To say that man has an impact is really self centered. Which is why I said that the next few years is going to show the impact that the sun has on the earth. We are already seeing some of that impact with the current cold temps around the globe. MMGW in my mind is that the earth is getting warmer because we (man) are causing it. But the evidence that I see is that it is a natural cycle.
Everyone want to discount the sun as causing the warming and cooling of the earth. The sun is the primary source of energy for the earth. What I don't understand is why every time the sun is brought up it is discounted.
Two pages to review and I appologize for the length of the second.
http://www.ilovemycarbondioxide.com/graphic.html
http://www.ilovemycarbondioxid...df/Climate_Science.pdf
Read those and tell me what you think.
Originally posted by: bobsmith1492
So... I planted 50,000 or so trees on our land; anyone want to give me five grand since they're feeling guilty about driving too much?
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: Comanche
Because those people that tell us that MMGW is happening and that we should be scared and do something about it are wrong.
Earth warms -- 1300's
Earth cools -- 1700's
Earth warms -- 1900's
Earth cools -- 1940's
Earth warms -- 1970's
Can't you see a pattern here. To say that man has an impact is really self centered. Which is why I said that the next few years is going to show the impact that the sun has on the earth. We are already seeing some of that impact with the current cold temps around the globe. MMGW in my mind is that the earth is getting warmer because we (man) are causing it. But the evidence that I see is that it is a natural cycle.
Everyone want to discount the sun as causing the warming and cooling of the earth. The sun is the primary source of energy for the earth. What I don't understand is why every time the sun is brought up it is discounted.
Two pages to review and I appologize for the length of the second.
http://www.ilovemycarbondioxide.com/graphic.html
http://www.ilovemycarbondioxid...df/Climate_Science.pdf
Read those and tell me what you think.
Solar variation theory has been around for quite some time. If you look at the results of the research you will see that it cannot account for the degree of warming we have seen in the last 30 years. It does not mean that it does not have an effect on the earth (duh), but just that it alone is not the cause.
In addition the rate of warming we have seen over the last 30 years is so huge compared to historical levels that it is obviously a statistically significant shift from patterns we have seen. This is why "the earth naturally cools and warms" is not a particularly compelling argument. For some unknown reason your second link is causing my computer to crash so I can't read it. This has been an on and off problem for me ever since I had to replace my new video card, screw you ATI.
If you want to read about solar variation theory and its effect on climate in comparison to greenhouse gasses there was a good article in Science magazine here.
Originally posted by: Comanche
Temperature variance can be attributed to the sun. The only graph that I can find that shows the temperature variance for the past 100 or so years is here.
http://icecap.us/images/uploads/USHCNTemps.jpg
Notice that the temp increase in the last 30 years is not as much at the temp increase from about 1900 to 1930.
Originally posted by: Comanche
Considering the graph that I posted, CO2 doesn't explain the lack of warming in the last 30 years.
Originally posted by: Comanche
Considering the graph that I posted, CO2 doesn't explain the lack of warming in the last 30 years.
Originally posted by: Comanche
Throckmorthon:
Every one of those graphs that you posted is flawed in that the 1930's was the warmest decade of the last century. I'm not even going to mention the hockey stick graph.
Originally posted by: Comanche
Throckmorthon:
Every one of those graphs that you posted is flawed in that the 1930's was the warmest decade of the last century. I'm not even going to mention the hockey stick graph.
Eskimospy:
I find the inconsistancy of the temps due to CO2 simply because of the graph that I posted. If CO2 were causing a warming, the graph would show a steady upward trend since the 1930's. That has been the time that we most heavily got into burning fossil fuels. Yet, from the late 1950's clear into the 1970's it got cooler. Enough so that "scientists" warned that we were going into another ice age.
If you take a look at sunspot activity over the past 400 years (the amount of time they have been studying them), you can see that sunspots more closely predict the temps here on earth. High sunspots, warmer temps. Low sunspots, cooler temps. CO2 doesn't explain the warming during the 1300's or the cooling during the mid 1900's.
Thats the best way I know how to explain what I think.
Yes it is.Originally posted by: MadRat
The energy taxes we pay are already effective as "carbon credits". The more you use the more money it takes to pay the tax. And since market forces sustain economic activity then the limiting factor is alreay set dynamically to reflect available energy usage which directly affects carbon emmissions.
I fear carbon credits as only one more way for corporate welfare to set hold in the economy. Isn't the economy strangled enough by the lack of competition in what are basically the consumer-essentials business sectors?