My belief in Global Warming is getting shaky

[Flying Binghi]

...and where is the physical evidence of this so called AGW ?

 

Aparently the sea ice continues to grow better then previous years - IJIS Web Site

[REASON]

...and where is the physical evidence of this so called AGW ?

 

Are you denying that the mean temperature has been rapidly increasing over the last 40 years, or just that humans have anything to do with it?

 

If you agree that the mean global temperature has been increasing at an accelerated rate as the temperature readings indicate, then what do you posit is the natural explanation that doesn't involve human activities? What is your evidence supporting an alternate explanation?

 

There is plenty of evidence that humans are converting stored carbon into carbon dioxide gas and releasing it into the atmosphere? Why shouldn't that be a scientific consideration in trying to understand what is causing the warming trend?

[Zythryn]

...and where is the physical evidence of this so called AGW ?

 

Are you questioning that mankind is adding more CO2 to the atmosphere than the earth can absorb? That seems very well documented.

Or, if you are looking for results of this, there are plenty.

The retreat of most glaciers on the planet is a troubling result which will, if the trend continues, cause lack of fresh water to many populations on the planet.

[Essay]

...Aparently the sea ice continues to grow better then previous years - IJIS Web Site

Better? What makes you say better?

 

FB, Nice chart, but do you know about the difference between "ice extent" and "ice quality?"

 

The extent of thin "new ice" in the winter looks reassuring, but the loss of thick "old ice" (shown by the lower lines in summer) is the worrying part.

===

 

Binghi,

Any chance I could get you to go back and look at post # 864 (and #849, mentioned in 864)?

http://hypography.com/forums/environmental-studies/13705-my-belief-global-warming-getting-shaky-87.html#post242356

 

You had brought up some good points which I tried to "answer." Do you agree with those points of mine, or do you have more questions?

 

~ :shrug:

[Flying Binghi]

the loss of thick "old ice"

 

...how goes the Artic undersea volcanic research ?

 

The ice extent charts show me that yes, there has been a steady decrease of the annual extent of ice. Now we see an increase in the extent of new sea ice for the time of year - would that not be because of colder air ? ...maybe the sun has something to do with it ?

 

As an aside, I was just watching a program about Mammoth DNA research (Sky TV) The scientists had extracted some remains from the (now) frozen permafrost. They believed the animal got stuck in boggy melted permafrost about 40'000 years ago - sorta suggests to me that the climate is always changing, and yes, its been much warmer before today.

[modest]

Aparently the sea ice continues to grow better then previous years - IJIS Web Site

 

You're somehow misreading the info presented at the IJIS website. On the page you link there is an option to download the raw satellite data which I have graphed in Excel and added a trendline,

 

 

As you can see, the area of arctic sea ice is decreasing over time according to the info presented at your link.

 

~modest

[Turtle]

...how goes the Artic undersea volcanic research ?

 

That would be a question for me then. :P It goes as slow as turtle's hum... well, as slow as turtles is good enough. :P It is ironic that the melting sea ice at the North Pole is what is allowing the exploration of the submarine volcanoes there. Who ya gonna call? :)

 

To be clear, my quibbles here are points of fine contention and in relation to the mechanics of the modeling, not quibbles with the actual measurements of the amount of CO2, the current rising temperatures, or the rates of increase.

 

I watched an automobile review show today and along with the mileage rating, they gave a "carbon footprint" number of how many tons per year of CO2 the car is expected to emit. The message is getting out to industry it seems, if for nothing else a selling point to customers. For it to work though, the customer has to care and so either they come caring or maybe leave caring. We'll see what we sea. :P :shrug:

[goku]

Well, Venus is an extreme example

 

personaly i reject that example, seeing how venus is closer to the sun than the earth B)

[modest]

The enormously CO

2

-rich atmosphere, along with thick clouds of sulfur dioxide, generates the strongest greenhouse effect in the solar system, creating surface temperatures of over 460 °C. This makes Venus's surface much hotter than Mercury's which has a minimum surface temperature of -220 °C and maximum surface temperature of 420 °C, even though Venus is nearly twice Mercury's distance from the Sun and receives only 25% of Mercury's solar irradiance.

 

-

Venus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

~modest

[Essay]

Modest, I guess those Sulfur Dioxide clouds don't cool the planet as they do here, huh? I'm sure they help reflect some energy, but obviously not enough; plus they probably act like insulators for the heat that is below them.

~~~

Now we see an increase in the extent of new sea ice for the time of year....

 

Every year is different. What's your point?

You seem to understand the signifcance of the "steady decrease" over time. Do you see some significance in this partial year trend?

===

 

"Old ice" will not reform unless it survives through the summer.

Regardless of the variation from year to year, that's not happening anymore, is it?

 

~ B)

[Moontanman]

personaly i reject that example, seeing how venus is closer to the sun than the earth B)

 

Goku, you can reject anything you want but it doesn't change the fact the Venus is much warmer than Mercury even though Mercury is much closer to the sun than Venus. All things being equal, if the Earth was at the orbit of Venus it's average temp would be about 125 F. But we can measure directly temps around 900 F. Your rejection will not change reality. The greenhouse effect is real and it accounts for not only the warmth we all feel but the rising temps we can measure.

[Flying Binghi]

...well, it looks like the Artic sea ice extent is not following the 'hocky stick' mantra.....ommmmm

 

----------------------------------------------------------

An interesting observation from an N.Z. stonemason -

 

temperature + CO2 = plant food

 

I wonder where it will take us ?

[Zythryn]

...well, it looks like the Artic sea ice extent is not following the 'hocky stick' mantra.....ommmmm

 

I don't believe anyone ever suggested that the artic sea ice extent should follow a hocky stick shaped pattern on a graph.

 

If you believe that it should, perhaps you should educate yourself on the positions you claim to be skeptical of.

[goku]

Well, Venus is an extreme example:

 

 

 

Venus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

oops, maybe i should have read that whole quote :)

 

for two reasons:

i would have seen that venus is hotter than mercury, and,

i would have also seen that venus is a bad comparison to earth, it has high levels of sulfur dioxide :shrug:

[goku]

Just look at what a large volcano does to the climate for a few years (or more, depending....).

Civilization is just like a medium size volcano, running all the time.

What do you think will happen....

 

what? :shrug:

are volcanos man made?

[goku]

hey wait a minute, volcanos, that is a very good point.

all that toxic, murder, death, kill gas they spit out.........

yet we're still here :shrug:

 

it's almost like somebody made these natural things that clean the air of natural volcano death gas, naturally :)

[Turtle]

hey wait a minute, volcanos, that is a very good point.

all that toxic, murder, death, kill gas they spit out.........

yet we're still here :)

 

it's almost like somebody made these natural things that clean the air of natural volcano death gas, naturally :)

 

You have taken a twisted conclusion to Modest's words and our mentions of volcanoes. In the first place, terrestrial volcanoes don't continually erupt at rates the comparison referred to. On a second point, which is my call for investigation of submarine volcanoes, the simple fact is we don't even know how many there are, how many are active, and what their history is so logically we can't use that information in climate models. QED

 

Yes there are natural things taking in CO2, but in this case of us'ns here-n-now, we have conveniently chopped down and or let burn those little beauties in great numbers while at the same time giving them more work to do. Shall we cut your grazing land Goku and give you another 30 head of cows? What will you naturally do then? :shrug: :)