remind me again what the temperature should be today, had humans not pumped CO2 into the atmosphere...

5/7/2010 4:42:42 PM

Quote :

"There is always some uncertainty associated with scientific conclusions; science never absolutely proves anything."

5/7/2010 4:56:37 PM

OMFG THIS IS PROOF THE GULF STREAM/NORTH ATLANTIC CURRENT SYSTEM IS SHUTTING DOWN!

5/7/2010 8:15:32 PM

Quote :

"remind me again what the temperature should be today, had humans not pumped CO2 into the atmosphere..."

There are models that show the temprature increase due to CO2. Go and find them if you're actually curious, but we all know you won't believe them anyway.

5/7/2010 8:39:14 PM

and how are the models doing at predicting the current temperature? again, I'm simply asking what temperature we should be at right now, and on what that is based. seems like a really simple question if, in fact, the "science is settled."

5/7/2010 9:15:36 PM

The problem is that these people don't understand the importance of looking only at the polar warming. They think equatorial and temperate cooling offsets polar warming and thats where they go wrong. They don't understand the scientific significance of slight polar warming vs slight mid latitude cooling. They think it cancels out.

5/7/2010 9:30:22 PM

Quote :

"China alone loses between 100 million and 200 million tons of coal each year to mine fires, as much as 20 percent of their annual production, according to the International Institute for Geo-Information Science and Earth Observation, based in Enschede, Netherlands. The Institute estimates that carbon dioxide emissions from these fires are as high as 1.1 billion metric tons, more than the total carbon dioxide emissions from automobiles in the United States. Second to China is India, where 10 million tons of coal burns annually in mine fires, contributing a further 51 million metric tons of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere."

http://www.earthmagazine.org/earth/article/33d-7da-5-5

5/9/2010 2:00:15 AM

Quote :

""

Looks like if things get bad enough, we can just move to Europe and Russia. I'm stoked!

5/9/2010 2:48:41 AM

You still fail to understand that if this goes through, the mid latitudes will end up much much colder than they are now.

5/9/2010 11:47:52 PM

if what goes through?

and are you trying to bring the suggestion that the Gulf stream will overturn or ocean currents will cease? Because, well, that's pretty much been dismissed outright, as there has been NO change in ocean currents. damn facts keep getting in the way >.<

but, I love the lack of falsifiability at this point. "IT'S FUCKING HOT!!!" GLobal warming, duh. "IT'S COLDER OVER HERE!!!" Global warming, duh! And I'll bet if the temperature stays the same, it's due to Global Warming as well, right?

[Edited on May 10, 2010 at 6:42 PM. Reason : ]

5/10/2010 6:40:31 PM

Its not about global temperatures. The term "global warming" is just a pop misnomer. The correct term is "global climate change" which is caused by warming specifically warming in the polar regions. Climate change is already being seen as well as polar thaw, both at alarming rates.

5/10/2010 6:48:31 PM

Quote :

"warming in the polar regions"

how come the north pole is losing ice and the antarctic ice sheet is gaining ice?

5/10/2010 8:04:19 PM

^Antarctica is losing ice mass.
http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/20100108_Is_Antarctica_Melting.html

5/10/2010 9:32:38 PM

isnt it gaining area and growing horizontally

[Edited on May 10, 2010 at 9:44 PM. Reason : .]

5/10/2010 9:37:48 PM

so, if it's not about global temperatures, then why is there a rush to find the global average temperatures? Why is that the standard metric? Wouldn't that be kind of muddying the waters too much? Seems that it would even lead to possibly hurting their case, as the global temperatures might show one thing while the polar temperatures show something completely different.

and how, exactly, are the poles losing ice at "an alarming rate" when the ice extent is still well within the statistical margin of error? You miiiiiight want to bone up on some of this stuff before you go off spouting nonsense. Next you are gonna be telling us about how Mt. Kilamanjaro is gonna be ice-free in 50 years...

5/10/2010 9:44:11 PM

^^there have been slight increases in area, which in part come from migrating ice sheets outwards. the overall mass of ice has decreased, however.

5/10/2010 10:25:10 PM

do they have any type of technology to measure the mass under the surface? that would be pretty cool

5/10/2010 10:26:22 PM

Quote :

"Gravity data collected from space using NASA's Grace satellite show that Antarctica has been losing more than a hundred cubic kilometers (24 cubic miles) of ice each year since 2002."

looks like they are using gravity anomalies to track ice mass.

5/10/2010 11:48:43 PM

but is that just ice visible on satellite above sea level, or does it also measure anything underwater

5/11/2010 12:01:35 AM

Yes. It is a ranging experiment:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_Recovery_and_Climate_Experiment

5/11/2010 12:35:15 AM

Quote :

" the mission uses a microwave ranging system to accurately measure changes in the speed and distance between two identical spacecraft flying in a polar orbit about 220 kilometers (137 miles) apart, 500 kilometers (311 miles) above Earth. The ranging system is so sensitive it can detect separation changes as small as 10 microns—about one-tenth the width of a human hair over a distance of 220 kilometers"

awesome

5/11/2010 1:14:17 AM

^ Geez. Has no one considered that we're losing ice mass because we have a pair of spaceships MICROWAVING THE EARTH?

5/11/2010 3:21:44 PM

lol

or (on a more serious note) from subsurface volcanic activity?

5/11/2010 3:34:33 PM

Ann Coulter says that since it snowed in all fifty states this year global warming is a hoax for "chubby co-eds."

I love this logic. That lady is a retard.

5/11/2010 5:23:38 PM

Quote :

"Sahara Desert Greening Due to Climate Change? Scientists are now seeing signals that the Sahara desert and surrounding regions are greening due to increasing rainfall. If sustained, these rains could revitalize drought-ravaged regions, reclaiming them for farming communities. This desert-shrinking trend is supported by climate models, which predict a return to conditions that turned the Sahara into a lush savanna some 12,000 years ago."

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/07/090731-green-sahara.html

5/11/2010 8:45:46 PM

Quote :

"a return to conditions that turned the Sahara into a lush savanna some 12,000 years ago."

clearly there was some huge civilization pumping CO2 into the air 12,000 years ago

5/11/2010 8:57:26 PM

Quote :

""Here you have an animal that is supposed to live in the Pacific and because the ice in the Arctic is melting, it managed to get through this corridor near the Bering Strait," Scheinin told AFP. "

http://sg.news.yahoo.com/afp/20100512/tts-environment-israel-species-animal-wh-c1b2fc3.html

5/12/2010 9:09:26 AM

really? the beiring strait is always froze up? really?

5/12/2010 6:42:51 PM

I wonder what the world was like before humans caused animals to migrate.

5/13/2010 11:38:48 AM

I downloaded the Lieberman Kerry "American Power Act" in .pdf format, but I'm afraid to even try to read this thing...its 987 pages?!

5/13/2010 4:51:05 PM

I doubt Kerry or Lieberman have read it either

5/13/2010 4:55:07 PM

Quote :

"Although most lizards evolve too slowly to adapt to the changes, some are able to survive by moving to higher altitudes where it is cooler. But the team found that this displaces other lizard species that normally live at those altitudes, leading to their loss. Reducing carbon dioxide emissions could prevent some of the future extinctions, Sinervo said, but the amount already present is sufficient to cause a loss of 20% of the lizard population and 6% of lizard species worldwide by 2050. The researchers are convinced that their conclusions are correct but, Sites said, "This is one time when I would love to be proven wrong.""

Lizards face extinction because of global warming, study finds

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/may/13/science/la-sci-lizards-20100513/2

5/16/2010 12:22:25 PM

think of the lizards!

because it's clearly obvious that lizards won't move elsewhere. they will just die

fantastic study, though. take an unproven and highly questionable thing, and then show it is causing animals to die. what fucking great science we have here! I mean, if you can take something that hasn't even been shown to actually be happening and use that as a premise for an experiment? really? is that what science has been reduced to?

5/16/2010 1:41:20 PM

... because aaronburro knows more than a article published in Science.

5/16/2010 1:43:26 PM

it doesn't take a fucking genius to know that you shouldn't use something that hasn't been proven as the independent variable in an experiment.

5/16/2010 1:46:06 PM

You clearly did not read the article.

Either that, or youre too dumb to understand it.

5/16/2010 1:48:57 PM

heard it on NPR the other day, actually. rolled my eyes just as much as I would have had I read it.

the point still stands. the guy goes out, find lizards missing, and assumes it is 100% due to temperature. he then blames it on a theory whose models can't even reproduce future temperature records. sounds pretty fucking stupid, if you ask me.

5/16/2010 2:16:39 PM

Quote :

"and assumes it is 100% due to temperature"

lol

5/16/2010 2:23:28 PM

lol

5/16/2010 2:30:44 PM

except in science, global warming is fact

Quote :

" because it's clearly obvious that lizards won't move elsewhere. they will just die "

studies have been done and the velocities of climate change are much greater than the velocities through which many ecosystems can move.

5/16/2010 4:19:40 PM

yeah, cause science is just full of "facts"

5/16/2010 6:08:57 PM

let's all do ourselves a favor and ignore mambagrl.

5/16/2010 10:27:11 PM

yep. it's so much a fact that we can say what the average temperature should have been last year. what was that, again?

5/16/2010 10:53:27 PM

BECUASE IF WE DONT KNOW WHAT TEMPERATURES SHOULD BE THEN GLOBAL WARMING CANT BE HAPPENING RIGHT GUYS?

5/16/2010 11:48:09 PM

because there are "facts" in science, right Kris? not theories, or supported conclusions, or hypotheses, but "facts", right?

but seriously, if AGW is happening, that particular hypotheses is based on current data, as well as predicted data

But when your theory relies on predicted data, and you can't use those models to accurately predict data, we just just assume AGW is a scientific "fact", right?

ps: because we don't know if there is a God that means there can't be a God right guys?

5/16/2010 11:55:48 PM

Quote :

"because there are "facts" in science, right Kris? not theories, or supported conclusions, or hypotheses, but "facts", right?"

Only a fool would believe that. There are different levels of confidence in certain explanations of natural phenomena, but we don't know any of it completely. There are facts in finite systems like math and logic, but we can't define the real world in such simple terms, but we try, and it has worked well for us.

5/17/2010 12:03:01 AM

exactly, which is why I called out mambagrl for stating AGW as a fact in the first place

5/17/2010 12:07:37 AM

http://www.fukung.net/v/26312/d3b296f5c7421325e222c22b38372bd5.jpg

5/21/2010 2:00:09 AM

yes. we will create a "better world" by crippling our economy and putting a new massive tax in place. riiiiiiight.

5/23/2010 7:40:38 PM

If doing all the things on that list "cripples" your economy then how good was it in the first place? But I do appreciate a bit of insight into your type of mentality.

5/23/2010 9:30:31 PM