Global warming or not?

[Greg Anos]

There have been 4 Ice Ages in the last 2 million years, and 4 massive warm-ups in between. Only the last 500 years can be (at most) attributed to Man. We can't explain why the Ice Ages, so why are we so hyped up to rebuild the world with such a short base line.

Besides, the world is going to be rebuilt over the next 50 years anyway, from pure economic reasons, anyway.

[recluse]

I'll just toss this into the fire because I enjoy being a trouble maker: by my count, I have gotten 15 lbs. of paper in the mail asking me to help save the enviorment this year alone. Save the Earth: Kill the Trees?
P.S.: I don't watch any T.V. news. What's an Inhofe?

[WT Sharpe]

Originally Posted by recluse

I'll just toss this into the fire because I enjoy being a trouble maker: by my count, I have gotten 15 lbs. of paper in the mail asking me to help save the enviorment this year alone. Save the Earth: Kill the Trees?

Our side gets no points for consistency there. There are surely better ways to save our environment.

Originally Posted by recluse

P.S.: I don't watch any T.V. news. What's an Inhofe?

You'll find the definition in the dictionary under "Enemy of the planet."

[Greg Anos]

Better ways...Hmmm....

Lest it be said I don't have suggestions....

Here's an answer for the car/truck issue, using existing technology - but it'll cost a lot up-front. Rebuild the interstate highway system, to put in inductive power sources in the road bed. Car/truck pull electricity via an induction coil from the inductive source, to run the car/truck. The car/truck has 40-50 miles worth of battery in it, for off-source use. Plug in at home at night for local use. But this'll cost the price of rebuilding the nationwide roadbeds, as well as around 100 nuke plants...

Global warmists - are you willing to pay the price???

[happy_terd]

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

Better ways...Hmmm....

Global warmists - are you willing to pay the price???

A lot of them are like the health care reformists. They are willing to let someone else pay the price.

[TGS]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

The opposition has Inhofe.

Part of whose platform is to make English the national language of the US. Getting Americans to speak English is a much more difficult job than halting global warming, eliminating world poverty and bringing peace to the Middle East, put together.

[happy_terd]

[WT Sharpe]

Deniers

[Greg Anos]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

Deniers

Love it - the hockey stick graph has been discredited - ever by the global warming scientists.....

[WT Sharpe]

Originally Posted by happy_terd

Seven oceans rising? Are the Minnesotans For Global Warming including extraterrestrial oceans in their assessment, or does geography somehow work differently in Minnesota?

[happy_terd]

Al gore and his team of scientists did the research on that one. We just follow him blindly is all.

[WT Sharpe]

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

Love it - the hockey stick graph has been discredited - ever by the global warming scientists.....

From Scientific American:

http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...onsense&page=2

Claim 2: The alleged "hockey stick" graph of temperatures over the past 1,600 years has been disproved. It doesn't even acknowledge the existence of a "medieval warm period" around 1000 A.D. that was hotter than today is. Therefore, global warming is a myth.

It is hard to know which is greater: contrarians' overstatement of the flaws in the historical temperature reconstruction from 1998 by Michael E. Mann and his colleagues, or the ultimate insignificance of their argument to the case for climate change.

First, there is not simply one hockey-stick reconstruction of historical temperatures using one set of proxy data. Similar evidence for sharply increasing temperatures over the past couple of centuries has turned up independently while looking at ice cores, tree rings and other proxies for direct measurements, from many locations. Notwithstanding their differences, they corroborate that Earth has been getting sharply warmer.

A 2006 National Research Council review of the evidence concluded "with a high level of confidence that global mean surface temperature was higher during the last few decades of the 20th century than during any comparable period during the preceding four centuries"—which is the section of the graph most relevant to current climate trends. The report placed less faith in the reconstructions back to 900 A.D., although it still viewed them as "plausible." Medieval warm periods in Europe and Asia with temperatures comparable to those seen in the 20th century were therefore similarly plausible but might have been local phenomena: the report noted "the magnitude and geographic extent of the warmth are uncertain." And a new research paper by Mann and his colleagues seems to confirm that the Medieval Warm Period and the “Little Ice Age” between 1400 and 1700 were both caused by shifts in solar radiance and other natural factors that do not seem to be happening today.

After the NRC review was released, another analysis by four statisticians, called the Wegman report, which was not formally peer reviewed, was more critical of the hockey stick paper. But correction of the errors it pointed out did not substantially change the shape of the hockey stick graph. In 2008 Mann and his colleagues issued an updated version of the temperature reconstruction that echoed their earlier findings.

But hypothetically, even if the hockey stick was busted... What of it? The case for anthropogenic global warming originally came from studies of climate mechanics, not from reconstructions of past temperatures seeking a cause. Warnings about current warming trends came out years before Mann’s hockey stick graph. Even if the world were incontrovertibly warmer 1,000 years ago, it would not change the fact that the recent rapid rise in CO2 explains the current episode of warming more credibly than any natural factor does—and that no natural factor seems poised to offset further warming in the years ahead.

[wodin]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

Seven oceans rising? Are the Minnesotans For Global Warming including extraterrestrial oceans in their assessment, or does geography somehow work differently in Minnesota?

Well, for one thing Minnesota is about 1,300 feet above sea level, those oceans would need to rise a fair bit!

[WT Sharpe]

Originally Posted by wodin

Well, for one thing Minnesota is about 1,300 feet above sea level, those oceans would need to rise a fair bit!

So that's it! The Minnesotans For Global Warming is really a front group for a cabal of entrepreneurs seeking waterfront property!

That’s the most deviously sinister plot since Lex Luthor’s California earthquake scheme in Superman: the Movie!

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by WT Sharpe

Deniers