Global warming

[Leisureguy]

I thought it would be interesting just to get a profile of opinions represented by our little group. No efforts to convince one way or the other, just wanted to see what people thought.

UPDATE: At Kalypso's suggestion, I'll add now (4/11) that, as the discussion has evolved, I have attempted to counter what I see as weak arguments against the evidence that global warming is happening, and I have also brought in evidence and arguments that the cause in human activity. I suppose I could have simply been silent as arguments against global warming were advanced, but I thought a response was appropriate.

I didn't foresee this when I posted the poll. I assumed that I'd get poll responses, but no one would be advancing arguments one way or the other. It turned out differently, and I adapted.

My apologies for not foreseeing the direction the discussion would likely go. I assure one and all that I had no nefarious purpose. Indeed, I thought that there was pretty general agreement that global warming is happening and that it's due to human causes. I had not idea that so many would view it as not happening at all, nor that many would think that human activity had nothing to do with it. Amazing, to me.

_________________
Michael
My blog

[Scrapyard Ape]

I think its a combination of 2 and 3. It's natural(evidence of past warming cycles have been found in the fossil and geologic record) and has been exacerbated by human activity. I doubt very much that human efforts can reverse the current trend. The planet is going to do what she will.

_________________
~Greg

[Austin]

I think we contribute to this mess. We hate to admit it but we tend to ignore symptoms of our ignorance.

[Leisureguy]

California has shown that quite a bit can be done to reduce carbon footprint with essentially no adverse effects on lifestyle, and that's before we bring out the heavy technology (e.g., LED light bulbs (just starting to appear), more efficient transportation, etc.). Paul Krugman:

[Sinatra]

I hope I don't ignite any partisan passions with this remark... I cannot stand how many people, but especially Republican Representatives and Senators (I have not met a single Republican voter that denies global warming) how dismiss global warming as some liberal scare tactic. Denying global warming is like denying the link between tobacco use and cancer. Not surprisingly I recently read an article by Newsweek that states that many former "scientists" how worked for organizations that denied the link between smoking and cancer; now they are working for organizations that deny global warming!

Sorry rant over... I am just annoyed that my party is turning into an embarrassment...

Pat

_________________
"Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the president."
-Theodore Roosevelt

[Leisureguy]

The worst, IMHO, is James Inhofe, US Senator from my natal state of Oklahoma, who gets large contributions from the oil industry and decries global warming as a hoax perpetrated by scientists. His witness for this, you'll recall, was the science-fiction writer Michael Crichton.

_________________
Michael
My blog

[rustyblade]

This whole Global Warming thing has become like religion and politics all rolled into one. Heavy duty stuff.

I reached my I'm gonna go crazy limit last week when in the local paper there was an article stating the town will raise the price of water by 14% to help fight global warming. Whaaat? I'm not going to even go into that one as it is making me rip my hair out.

I'm just going to tune out of this BS until it blows over with the minus -27C windchill we have here.

The only way to solve the "problem" is to control world population, see how far that goes.

_________________
Richard

[Sam]

Richard, I wonder if they doubled the price, would that help global warming any better?

There is evidence of warming and cooling cycles having occured well before our times. Yet I do think that emissions could play a part. Yet like our bodies, I believe that the Earth has adaptive and restorative capabilities. It is a good idea to recycle, to cut our dependency on oil and other fossil fuels, take shorter showers, but industry moves on and the global economy is going to be affected.

[Welshie]

Global warming is happening, but i really believe its a natural thing, average temperatures are up, but the world doesn't have average temperatures because it is the same temp all the time, it has its highs and its lows. In the summer, i hear the local news stations saying its hotter than its been in 150 yrs(not the exact amount but somewhere in the 100's) so that means 150 years ago it was as hot as it is now, and global warming wasn't a threat back then, scientists tell us its a brand new thing we created over the past 50 or so years. So to me its completely natural, the earth repairs itself, just look at how the hole in the ozone has gotten smaller recently. So we might be able to slow it for a while, but its gonna happen. Thats not to say we should just do whatever we want with coal and oil, I'm all for helping the environment. And for getting the oil industry out of politics, many politicians own or owned something to do with the oil industry, its no wonder we don't have a mass produced alternative fuel for cars yet.

_________________
~~Trey~~

[Welshie]

[Rob]

Global warming is absolutely happening. But the increase is what, 1 degree Celsius? Unfortunately, global warming has become the new fad religion of the left and Hollywood. They're using global warming (caused by man) to describe anything wacky with the weather. It snows 20 feet in Canada, GASP! Global warming! Montana experiences 100 mph winds on the plains, GASP! Global warming! The Eastern Seaboard experiences/doesn't experience hurricanes, gasp! Global warming!

And what about Nebraska getting tornadoes? That's right, global warming. Monsoons in Asia? Yep, you guessed it: global warming. Sandstorms in Iraq? Unquestionably, global warming.

Unfortunately the adherents of this religion completely discount the effect of the earth itself on warming. Over 90% of the atmosphere's greenhouse gases are made up of that evil substance we know as H2O. And the Sun? That massive nuclear ball of fire that is nearly 1 million times bigger than the Earth? Surely it could not have any effect on the tiny little earth. No, we humans have much more effect on our playground than the unbelievably massive Sun.

And I find it amazing that global warming folks never chastise the Chinese or Indians for their massive 'carbon footprint'. Instead, they focus on the Great Satan. And if global warming, caused by man, was truly scientifically proven, then why isn't there total agreement? Science is not built on consensus, conferences, and projected computer models, it's built on proven, reproducible theory and experiments.

During the Roman times, some of the Middle East was tropical. There were massive farming lands in what is now Lebanon and Syria. Why? Because the global climate was even hotter than it is now. Where were the SUVs back then?

We had the global cooling fad of the 1970s and now we have the global warming fad of the 1990s and 2000s. In 20 years it'll be something new and just as ridiculous.

Whew.

_________________
Rob

Newbie's guide to cheap shaving tools
Shaving Soap/Cream, Pre & Aftershave Manufacturers List

[Leisureguy]

The ozone hole is gradually (very gradually) going away because of the actions taken to prohibit fluorocarbons. Had we continued, the hole would, I believe, have continued and continued to grow.

I've seen quite a few articles commenting on the heavy carbon footprint of China---plus their general cavalier attitude toward the environment. They may be taking some steps, but China is definitely a prime offender. The US gets a rap because we do in fact emit a lot of CO2 and because also the per-capita emissions in the US are off the scale. Plus, of course, the current government has denied global warming until quite recently.

The vanishing of the Arctic icecap and the glaciers is, of course, hard to deny. And in many cases the temperature records are indeed records---never before with recorded temperatures so high.

YMMV. But the consensus of scientists worldwide is pretty clear: (a) global warming is here, and (b) it's caused by human factors. These are people who have actually studied the data.

_________________
Michael
My blog

[Carrington]

Well if we all open up our 5th grade science books we will see that the Earth was once covered in lava. After that it experienced two ice ages. Any one with common sense will conclude that these cycles will continue for the life of this planet. Heres a fact not many people think about. When it's -20 F many places like it has been over the past month you will not find one news story questioning the validity of global warming. But as soon as it's 50 degrees in February, thats all you see. I agree with Rob TN on this one. While the Earth has warmed one degree over the past century the whole gloabal warming thing has become more of a hip fad

[Carrington]

[Carrington]

Rob_TN wrote:

[rustyblade]

[Pete_T]

From what Ive seen global warming is similar to evolution in the people decrying it have a great deal to gain (or to lose) with the idea they are refuting becoming a recognized fact, while the people supporting it have little to gain, at least on a personal level. Whose more trustworthy, a scientist who is merely reporting his studies, or a corporation that produces millions of cubic tons of greenhouse gasses a year?

I fully understand the cynism related to media hype, and Im pretty sick of that myself. The problem is when they finally hit on something that actully is a threat, its really easy to dimiss it.

Even if I didnt believe the scientists, I do believe my own eyes. There are different types of reptiles and amphibians becoming more and less dominat in the area that I live. When I was a kid there there hundreds of chamelons (the little green kind) running around, now they are gone and there are these repulsive clear salamanders, and tree frogs taking their place, both of which I never saw in the past.

The Earth does fluctuate in tmp, obviously, but I really dont see what there is to lose by making sure we dont exacerbate the the fluctuation. It only takes a chage of a few degrees to really screw things up. Being on the Gulf coast, I saw evidence of that summer before last. Remeber that really vicious hurricane cycle, with Katrina as the star? I think there were like ten or more hurricanes total. That was caused by a 1-2 degree temp increase in the gulfs water.

[Leisureguy]

Some interesting graphs:

Global Warming Map

Instrumental Temperature Record

2000-year temperature reconstruction

CO2 variations

On that last one, scroll down for a useful set of graphs, especially the last three:

Expanded record of CO2 from the last 50 years at Mauna Loa
CO2 at Mauna Loa since 1958. [1] [2]
Trends of major greenhouse gases.
Solar variation and greenhouse gases during 420,000 years.
Recent global CO2 emissions, logarithmic scale.
Carbon dioxide variations during the last 550 million years.
400,000 year Carbon dioxide variation (ancestor image).
650,000 year Carbon dioxide and temperature variation showing correlation.

_________________
Michael
My blog

[stanmog]

Michael,
I've been a scientist for my entire professional career, and if there's one thing I've learned, it's that today's concensus is tomorrow's discarded mistake. Remember the "consensus" about the coming ice age from the 1970's? Remember the dire predictions in the 1960's from Ehrlich of a world starved to death because of population growth? There's a LOT more politics than science in the global warming hysteria. And scientists are no different from anyone else: they have their prejudices and politics, and they need funding.
And for those who ask what's the harm in following the suggestions of the global warming alarmists, remember that every dollar spent on avoiding a hypothetical crisis is a dollar not spent on providing food, shelter, water and medicine to someone in need. Resources are not infinite. Lundborg (The Skeptical Environmentalist) estimated that the amount of money required to implement all the recommendations made to prevent global warming would cost as much as could provide food, water, medical care and shelter to every poor person on earth.
And for those who don't realize the dangers of mixing politics and science, let me remind you of Rachel Carson. Carson, and her disciples, mounted a successful world-wide campaign to stop production of DDT, in the complete absence of ANY solid science that DDT posed any harm to humans. As a result tens of millions of people have died from malaria. In my opinion, no one in history has ever been responsible for more human deaths than Rachel Carson.

Regards,
Stan (ducking for cover)

[stanmog]

Let me give you another example of some of the not-so-perfect ways scientists may work. So as not to invoke any legal problems, specifics are eliminated, but the following story is true from my own experience.
In the late 1970's and early 80's, there were two drugs available for treating one of the country's most common acute illnesses, A and B. Drug A had been around for years, and cost $200 per dose, and had proven effectiveness in one of the largest clinical trials ever done. Drug B was newly genetically engineered and cost $2000 per dose. Drug B's maker sponsored trials comparing it to drug A. The published results showed drug B was somewhat beetter than drug A, and the maker of B mounted a tremendous marketing campaign. Drug B became the treatment of choice in the US. Europe and the rest of the world continued to use drug A at least to some extent. I was personally involved in some of these studies, and I can tell you that some of the data regarding adverse effects of drug B never made it into the final published studies. And I can also tell you that at least one of the principal investigators was given thousands of dollars in stock options for drug B's company, while the studies were ongoing. Such is science.

Regards,
Stan