Gulf Of Thailand Won't Rise With Global Warming, Expert Claims

Venus .... with an atmosphere consisting almost totally of carbon dioxide (96%) --- should always be used as an example of "the greenhouse effect" when pontificating about the effects of increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere of our planet where today the concentration of CO2 is less than 0.05%.

A_Traveller · December 15, 2009

Noting the leaded petrol and CFC post above, there is one of the world's bizarrest factoids that one man was centrally responsible for the development of them. Thomas Midgley, Jr. an engineer turned chemist developed both, on behalf of General Motors.

Regards

edit typo//

Edited December 15, 2009 by A_Traveller

tig28 · December 15, 2009

Please consult an introductory textbook on global warming before posting.......thanks.

I think it is the absolute world class arrogance of it that is most impressive!!

It is possible that reading all those links may have caused your obvious myopia and I prefer not to risk it thank you.

JR Texas · December 15, 2009

Think what you like, but perhaps this might help:

http://oceanworld.tamu.edu/resources/ocean...atmosphere.html

"It would seem that the composition of the atmosphere would be stratified with different chemical composition at different heights. In fact, mixing in the atmosphere causes the composition to be nearly uniform up to about 80 km."

I also recommend you reading this:

Global warming skeptics suffer from foot in mouth” disease.

http://www.examiner.com/x-17297-Rochester-...n-mouth-disease

That, to me, is an incredible picture of what is at stake.........OUR FREAKIN' ATMOSPHERE! Nothing important, right?

Now, back to the real world of consequences of global warming and climate change:

Maldives warns global warming threatening islands Reuters

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSL07611784

WIPED OUT Global warming sows disease, extinctions, researchers say.

http://www.world-science.net/othernews/060111_warmingfrm.htm

Great Barrier Reef facing 'catastrophic damage' from climate change - Telegraph

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environme...ate-change.html

The list of consequences for acting irresponsibly to present and future generations is enormous: famine, war and ethnic violence, disease, mass migrations of people, species loss, global economic collapse.........etc., etc., etc.

If you really want to understand all of this, go here:

IPCC - Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

http://www.ipcc.ch/

tig28 · December 15, 2009

^ Whilst a good read and not wishing to detract from your point, unfortunately Ms. Sobels' work for understandable reasons emphasised the differences between Maskelyn and Harrison, but it should be noted that it was Maskelyn himself who advised the board to provide an interim payment of 10,000 pounds [about 2 million usd today] to Harrison. Maskelyn's point was that the lunar approach [which was supported by many] offered an effective solution as well, especially since he was the first Astronomer Royal to make his observations and results available to all, petitioning Parliament to pay for the printing of what was to become the Nautical Almanac. Originally marine chronometers could account for a third of the cost of a vessel, and until, as happened relatively quickly, they were more affordable [say one years skilled pay] Maskelyn's method was of marine importance.
However, Harrison's extraordinary skill has, in part because of the 'tension' described in the book, become more widely known and recognised.

Regards

Hi AT and RickBradford

Interesting from both. Have a small antique watch collection and always have been amazed by Harrisons achievements which occupied almost all his lifetime. I believe his first time pieces were made from wood. Re the "prize" offered by the British Govt. --- it was 20,000 pounds and even after completing the first required test they refused to pay up suggesting the great result (5 sec slow to Jamaica ) was luck.

Forced into a second test the 68 Y.O. Harrison took his timepiece (H4) to Jamacia ..... testing alongside another ship using the Lunar Distances system. Harrisons method proved twice as accurate and importantly much simpler. Now still skeptical they only offered 10,000 pounds and demanded all rights to the design. The board also kidnapped H4.

It is a brilliant and sad story ... of brilliance! Harrison was dead before the balance of the prize was paid.

tig28 · December 15, 2009

That, to me, is an incredible picture of what is at stake.........OUR FREAKIN' ATMOSPHERE! Nothing important, right?

In all the rambling, disjointed tripe you have been posting -- this and only this --- has any veracity whatsoever.

The well being of our atmosphere is far - far too important to allow decisions about its care to be influenced or dictated by the rabid, biased mental farts of the demonstratively and truly mislead.

Unbridled enthusiasm for ones beliefs is one thing --- but insulting unbalanced repetition of ridiculous theories supported by endless links to unrelated but equally biased web sites pushes your argument to the threshold of normal behavior. Come-on tell us about Venus again !

Unlike yourself ... I do not consider those who do not agree with me as either stupid or some form paid performer. Normally I would not seek to ridicule those who disagree with me ...........

But .... You are truly offensive !!

JR Texas · December 15, 2009

Thanks you........add "offensive" to the list of things I am

Now, attempts at distraction aside, here are more consequences resulting from global warming (A-Z):

http://climateprogress.org/2009/12/10/glob...ctsfrom-a-to-z/

A. East Antarctica, long stable, is now losing ice.

B. Bolivia needs $1 billion over the next seven years to build reservoirs, as the glaciers that hold the nation’s water supply are shrinking rapidly.

C. Leatherback sea turtles that spawn on the beaches of Costa Rica are threatened with extinction by warmer temperatures and rising seas.

D. Denmark joined United States, Norway, Canada, and Russia in identifying climate change as “the most important long-term threat” to future existence of polar bears.

E. The rapidly warming highlands of Ethiopia are becoming too hot for its elite athletes, such as local-born Haile Gebrselassie, to train there.

F. Noting the unprecedented floods this year in Fiji, Prime Minister Commodore Voreqe Bainimarama recently warned that rising sea levels affect not just the islands’ economies, but put into doubt the very existence of his nation.

G. Greece suffered through another storm of extreme wildfires this summer as heat waves and drier conditions increase.

H. Global warming-fueled hurricanes, intense poverty, and widespread deforestation combine to form a gathering storm of disasters for Haiti.

I. The deforested peatlands of Indonesia are drying, disintegrating, and burning.

J. The increasingly early arrival of cherry blossoms in Japan reflects rising global temperatures.

K. The more frequent and severe droughts that are killing off the elephants will likely trigger more conflicts in the arid lands of northeast Kenya.

L. The incidence of wildfires in the cedar forests of Lebanon has increased tremendously over recent years.

M. “If things go business-as-usual, we will not live, we will die,” Maldives President Mohammad Nasheed told the UN General Assembly. “Our country will not exist.”

N. The ministers of Nepal have held the world’s highest cabinet meeting on Mount Everest, as rapidly rising temperatures have reduced snowfall over the mountains and caused glaciers to melt.

O. More than 50 per cent of the population of Oman lives on coastlines vulnerable to rising seas, but its supplies of peridotite may help sequester carbon dioxide emissions.

P. The massive floods that killed hundreds in the Philippines this summer are becoming the norm.

QPetroleum-soaked Qatar emits 60 tons of carbon dioxide per person, the most of any nation on earth.

R. Increased floods and malaria outbreaks from global warming, deforestation, and unsanitary conditions have hit Rwanda hard in the past decade.

S. The inhabitants of the Alpine villages of Fieschertal and Fiesch in Switzerland have asked for the Pope to bless their prayers for the restoration of their nation’s glaciers, which shrank by 12 percent over the past decade.

T. Newly discovered, exotic species like the fanged frog of Thailand are especially vulnerable as climate change will further shrink their already restricted habitats.

U. Agriculture in the United States has been ravaged this year by catastrophic droughts in Texas and California, heat waves in Louisiana and Nebraska, storms across the High Plains and the Midwest, floods in North Dakota and Minnesota, and torrential rains in Illinois and Georgia.

V. Speaking from Vatican City on the eve of the Copenhagen conference, Pope Benedict XVI counseled “all people of good will to respect the laws laid down by God in nature and to rediscover the moral dimension of human life.”

W. Warming oceans and sea level rise threaten the coral reefs of the remote Polynesian islands of Wallis and Futuna.

X. The nomadic descendents of Kublai Khan in Inner Mongolia, where Xanadu once stood, are being driven from the grasslands as the Chinese government attempts to fight the region’s desertification.

Y. Sanaa, the capital of Yemen, may be the first capital city in the world to run out of water, as drought and overuse diminish its supply.

Z. On the border of Zambia and Zimbabwe, the flow of Victoria Falls is far below average, as drought and high temperatures reduce the Zambezi.

Oooooooooopss.........the "offensive one" is running out of letters........maybe we can add the Chinese alphabet to this to make the point clearer to those who are working for the ENERGY MAFIA.

canuckamuck · December 15, 2009

Think what you like, but perhaps this might help:

http://oceanworld.tamu.edu/resources/ocean...atmosphere.html

"It would seem that the composition of the atmosphere would be stratified with different chemical composition at different heights. In fact, mixing in the atmosphere causes the composition to be nearly uniform up to about 80 km."

Umm JR, Tig wasn't talking about literal layers in the atmosphere. It was an illustration using 100 percent as 1km. I think we are aware that the air is mixed and thicker than 1km.

But it does show how little attention you pay to evidence which is unfriendly to your faith.

RickBradford · December 15, 2009

Gore at climate talks - Polar ice may go in five years - COP15 United Nations Climate Change Conference Copenhagen 2009

Even the scientist whose figures he quoted says Globulous Al is wrong:

“It’s unclear to me how this figure was arrived at,” Dr Maslowski said. “I would never try to estimate likelihood at anything as exact as this.”

Mr Gore’s office later admitted that the 75 per cent figure [of ice loss] was one used by Dr Maslowksi as a “ballpark figure” several years ago in a conversation with Mr Gore.

“This is an exaggeration that opens the science up to criticism from sceptics,” Professor Jim Overland, a leading oceanographer at the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said.

Globulous Al is wheeled out like some old relic to peddle more meaningless alarmism based on hopeless computer models to the gullible twits at Copenhagen.

When the going gets desperate, the desperate get going.

tig28 · December 15, 2009

Think what you like, but perhaps this might help:

http://oceanworld.tamu.edu/resources/ocean...atmosphere.html

"It would seem that the composition of the atmosphere would be stratified with different chemical composition at different heights. In fact, mixing in the atmosphere causes the composition to be nearly uniform up to about 80 km."

Umm JR, Tig wasn't talking about literal layers in the atmosphere. It was an illustration using 100 percent as 1km. I think we are aware that the air is mixed and thicker than 1km.

But it does show how little attention you pay to evidence which is unfriendly to your faith.

There was a hint about that .....cunningly hidden in the first line --- but none are so blind as those who refuse to see !!!

"Imagine 1 kilometer of atmosphere and we want to get rid of the carbon pollution in it created by human activity. Let's go for a walk along it. "

Oh well .............nothing really new here.

BangkokJazz · December 15, 2009

I thought about writing another response, but then I realized - this back and forth has been going on for 50 pages. You guys don't have anything better to do? Go out and help some people, read to children, help an old lady across the street, something that produces some positive outcomes. You might see me, because I won't be visiting this thread's circus atmosphere again.

JR Texas · December 15, 2009

Actually, none of you are posting anything new. I am the only one doing it.

Your logic is simple: something small can't have a large impact.

Please follow that logic and do us all a favor and add a small amount of arsenic to your diet each day.

Some more stuff to think about:

Global warming has economic consequences

By Rachel Cleetus

http://www.progressive.org/media_mpcleetus111306

November 13, 2006

We can wait no longer on global warming.

But if we act now, we can save not only the environment but our economy, as well.

A new report puts a high price tag on unchecked global warming.

Written by a team of top economists and led by former World Bank Chief Economist Sir Nicholas Stern, the report concludes that fighting global warming now could save the world trillions of dollars.

The heat-trapping gases emitted from burning fossil fuels in automobiles and power plants are a major driving force behind global warming. Carbon dioxide, the most abundant heat-trapping gas, stays in the atmosphere for decades, making the Earth increasingly warm.

As a result, by the end of the century there could be a sharp rise in sea level, droughts, floods, storms, crop failures, ecosystem disruptions, threats to public health and other negative impacts from global warming. This could cost as much as 20 percent of the world's total economic output.

And now something old (people really should not forget this):

Group promoting climate skepticism has extensive ties to Exxon-Mobil

http://rawstory.com/2009/12/climate-skepti...ies-exxonmobil/

A group promoting skepticism over widely-accredited climate change science has a web of connections to influential oil giant Exxon-Mobil, Raw Story has found.

The organization is called the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), apparently named after the UN coalition International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). An investigation into the group reveals its numerous links to Exxon-Mobil, a vehement opponent of climate legislation andnotorious among scientists for funding global warming skeptics.

"Exxon-Mobil essentially funds people to lie," Joseph Romm,lauded climate expert and author of the blog Climate Progress, told Raw Story. "It's important for people to understand that they pay off the overwhelming majority of groups in the area of junk science."

The NIPCC's signature report, "Climate Change Reconsidered," disputes the notion that global warming is human-caused, insisting in its policy summary that "Nature, not human activity, rules the planet." Many of its assertions have been challenged by, among others, the scientists' blogRealClimate.

The report was released and promoted this summer by the Heartland Institute, a think tank thatclaims to support "common-sense environmentalism" as opposed to "more extreme environmental activism." It alleges that "Global warming is a prime example of the alarmism that characterizes much of the environmental movement."

Story continues below...

________________________________________

"To call global warming a hoax is to question every scientific journal, every scientific academy, and buy into the most extreme conspiracy theories," Romm said.

Heartland has received at least $676,500 from Exxon-Mobil since 1998, the year Exxon launched a campaign to oppose the Kyoto Treaty, according to official documents of the two groups that have been compiled and reproduced by the website ExxonSecrets.org. Also, the institute's self-describedGovernment Relations Adviser Walter F. Buchholtz has been a lobbyist for Exxon-Mobil, theWashington Post reported in 2004.

The study's two principal authors and NIPCC leaders S Fred Singer and Craig D Idso are both associated with various organizations that have gotten generous funding from Exxon-Mobil.

Singer has researched and published for the Cato Institute, which has accepted $125,000 in grants from Exxon-Mobil since 1998. Other professional affiliations include the National Center for Policy Analysis, Frontiers of Freedom, and American Council on Science and Health -- which have accepted contributions of $540,000, $1.27 million and $150,000, respectively, from Exxon.

Although some praise him as a hero, Singer has been slammed by many fellow climate scientists as "a fraud, a charlatan and a showman" for his unorthodox views and research.

His co-author Idso is founder, board chairman and former president of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, whose mission statement is to "separate reality from rhetoric in the emotionally-charged debate that swirls around the subject of carbon dioxide and global change." The organization has taken $100,000 in funding from Exxon since 1998, according to the oil company's reports.

Idso is also affiliated with the George Marshall Institute, which has reportedly won $840,000 from Exxon.

Exxon-Mobil has spent more money lobbying Congress in the last two years than any enterprise other than the Chamber of Commerce, dishing out $29 million in 2008 and over $20 million so far in 2009 to legislators. It's among the top 10 biggest spenders of lobbying cash since 1998, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

"Exxon has waged certainly the biggest, most concerted, and most extreme disinformation campaign on this issue," Romm told Raw Story. "The trouble is they don't have to win the argument -- all they have to do is blow smoke and cast doubt, and they've accomplished their end."

In a recent incident, hackers exposed private emails exchanged between climate scientists. Somesaid the revealed information didn't add up to a conspiracy, while others declared it definitive proof that anthropogenic global warming is made-up.

The Senate will soon take up the mantle on climate bill that the House narrowly passed this summer, and a heated debate is likely to occur in Congress over the nature of the threat and the type of action that needs to be taken.

"I think we're going to pass it, but it's going to be an epic struggle," Romm said.

Republican Sen. Orrin Harch has referenced the NIPCC report, calling it a "Comprehensive scientific answer to the IPCC [sic] Reports." Various blogs, such the conservative Free Republic, have touted this report as evidence that "global warming is not a crisis, and never was."

And we really should not forget to check out these links:

Links to lawsuits against BIG OIL/ENERGY MAFIA:

Groundbreaking Lawsuit Accuses Big Oil of Conspiracy to Deceive Public About Climate Change

Source: http://www.democracynow.org/2008/7/3/groun...uses_big_oil_of

Civil Conspiracy Lawsuits Filed Against Climate Change Deniers

http://solveclimate.com/blog/20091206/civi...-change-deniers

The Coming Global Warming “Scopes” Trial

Recent Climate Lawsuits Are Just the Tip of the Iceberg

http://www.scienceprogress.org/2008/07/glo...rming-in-court/

For Peru's Indians, Lawsuit Against Big Oil Reflects a New Era - Outsiders, NGOs and High-Tech Tools Help Document Firms' Impact

http://patagonia-under-siege.blogspot.com/...gainst-big.html

Sue Big Oil Over Global Warming? Court Tells Katrina Victims, Yes You Can!

Source: http://industry.bnet.com/energy/10002353/s...ms-yes-you-can/

Big Oil Going The Way Of Big Tobacco?

Source: http://bexhuff.com/2008/06/big-oil-going-t...-of-big-tobacco

Industry Ignored Its Scientists on Climate

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/24/science/earth/24deny.html

First Global Warming Lawsuit Against US Polluters a Success

Source: http://www.treehugger.com/files/2009/09/fi...mate-change.php

Courts Are Open for Climate Change Lawsuits against Power Companies

Source: http://www.internationallawoffice.com/News...25-d725987b458d

US rules greenhouse gases 'hazards'

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas...3433211121.html

Landmark Global Warming Lawsuit Settled

http://www.sustainablebusiness.com/index.c...isplay/id/17634

First Global Warming Lawsuit Against US Polluters a Success

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2009/09/fi...mate-change.php

Eskimos file lawsuit against oil companies

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews...-companies.html

More links:

Group promoting climate skepticism has extensive ties to Exxon-Mobil

http://rawstory.com/2009/12/climate-skepti...ies-exxonmobil/

Transition from oil to renewable energy 100 years away, says Exxon Mobil

Oil giant claims ‘no viable alternatives’ will emerge in the next century.

http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/energy/st...ys-exxon-mobilt

Climate change sceptics and lobbyists put world at risk, says top adviser

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009...cientist-watson

A Climate Deception Revisited: What's Behind the Signatures of 31,478 Skeptical "Scientists"

http://solveclimate.com/blog/20090806/clim...ical-scientists

Understanding why climate change means global famine

Source: http://greenfyre.wordpress.com/2009/01/19/...-global-famine/

No doubt: The earth is warming

The British Met Office has released world-wide temperature data into the public domain to give evidence that the globe is warming.

http://en.cop15.dk/news/view+news?newsid=2881

Climate Change Accelerating Beyond Expectations, Say Leading Scientists

New research emphasizes the urgency of large and rapid reductions in global emissions of greenhouse gases, especially carbon dioxide

http://scrippsnews.ucsd.edu/Releases/?releaseID=1033

News Release : CO2 Emissions Continue Significant Climb

http://www.whoi.edu/page.do?pid=7545&t...3506&ct=162

Specific links describing the ENERGY MAFIAS smear campaign:

http://democrats.science.house.gov/Media/F...y_testimony.pdf

http://www.ucsusa.org/news/press_release/E...ng-tobacco.html

http://www.ucsusa.org/assets/documents/glo...xxon_report.pdf

JetsetBkk · December 21, 2009

Actually, none of you are posting anything new. I am the only one doing it. <snip>

You crack me up.

A bit chilly in Europe at the mo.

thatguy · December 22, 2009

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article....;sc=SA_20091216

nisakiman · December 22, 2009

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article....;sc=SA_20091216

That article smacks of desperation. Scientific American is obviously part of the AGW "peer review club".

Have a look at this one...

http://www.infowars.com/climategate-peer-r...ming-alarmists/

Notable is this

We have long covered the fact that the so called “scientific consensus” on global warming is wholly manufactured and that there are thousands of scientists who have differing viewpoints to the human-induced warming theorists.

Indeed, over two years ago we reported the fact that a survey of over 500 peer reviewed scientific research papers on climate change, written between 2004 and 2007, concluded that
less than half endorsed the “consensus view,” that human activity is contributing to considerable global climate change.

We now have clear evidence that a concerted effort has been made by the IPCC connected climate scientists to block dissenting opinion on climate change, regardless of it’s scientific merit.

“This is horrible,” said Pat Michaels, a climate scientist at the Cato Institute in Washington who is
directly threatened with physical violence in the emails. “This is what everyone feared. Over the years, it has become increasingly difficult for anyone who does not view global warming as an end-of-the-world issue to publish papers. This isn’t questionable practice, this is unethical.”

I read this letter to a broadsheet newspaper the other day, which I found interesting

SIR – As a scientist and geologist, I detest the never-ending list of bogus scare stories about climate change, the latest being the acidification of the oceans.
Man is responsible for carbon dioxide emissions of around 26 gigatonnes per year. The oceans have a total mass of 1.3 billion gigatonnes. So if all the carbon dioxide from man was absorbed by the oceans as very weak carbonic acid (it is only partially absorbed), there would be a ratio of one part carbon dioxide to 50 million parts ocean per year, or one part per million per half century.

The number is far too small to have any possible impact.

Peter Miller

Ascot, Berkshire

The alarmists just keep on thinking up new stories to scare the children.

JetsetBkk · December 23, 2009

<snip>
The alarmists just keep on thinking up new stories to scare the children.

And a lot of "adults", unfortunately.

mojaco · December 23, 2009

I wonder if JR and similar are willing to live a subsistence non-oil, non-electrical life like the so-called "Hill Tribe" folks in my part of Thailand? I'm not, nor do the Hill Tribe peoples willingly do so. Or I wonder if JR&Co are willing to go all-nuclear in order for all oil-coal burning emissions to stop? I could go that (the only realistic alternative) route, but the "scare-mongers" got that stopped 30 years ago.

So, have fun living a subsistence lifestyle JR&Co!

moskito · December 23, 2009

maybe he meant the waterlevel will not rise because it dont have permission to do so from Thai Authorities

has he won his job in a lottery?

chuckd · December 25, 2009

I just got an e-mail from a friend in the US.

He has been busy on Christmas morning shoveling global warming off his driveway.

teatree · January 4, 2010

I agree with the Dr. A debate on global warming and a reassessment of the direction we are heading is long overdue and in the wake of 'climategate' this is already starting to happen.

Climategate: You should be steamed

By NEIL FRANK

HOUSTON CHRONICLE

Now that Copenhagen is past history, what is the next step in the man-made global warming controversy? Without question, there should be an immediate and thorough investigation of the scientific debauchery revealed by “Climategate.”

If you have not heard, hackers penetrated the computers of the Climate Research Unit, or CRU, of the United Kingdom's University of East Anglia, exposing thousands of e-mails and other documents. CRU is one of the top climate research centers in the world. Many of the exchanges were between top mainstream climate scientists in Britain and the U.S. who are closely associated with the authoritative (albeit controversial) Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Among the more troubling revelations were data adjustments enhancing the perception that man is causing global warming through the release of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other atmospheric greenhouse gases.

Particularly disturbing was the way the core IPCC scientists (the believers) marginalized the skeptics of the theory that man-made global warming is large and potentially catastrophic. The e-mails document that the attack on the skeptics was twofold. First, the believers gained control of the main climate-profession journals. This allowed them to block publication of papers written by the skeptics and prohibit unfriendly peer review of their own papers. Second, the skeptics were demonized through false labeling and false accusations.

Climate alarmists would like you to believe the science has been settled and all respectable atmospheric scientists support their position. The believers also would like you to believe the skeptics are involved only because of the support of Big Oil and that they are few in number with minimal qualifications.

But who are the skeptics? A few examples reveal that they are numerous and well-qualified. Several years ago two scientists at the University of Oregon became so concerned about the overemphasis on man-made global warming that they put a statement on their Web site and asked for people's endorsement; 32,000 have signed the petition, including more than 9,000 Ph.Ds. More than 700 scientists have endorsed a 231-page Senate minority report that questions man-made global warming. The Heartland Institute has recently sponsored three international meetings for skeptics. More than 800 scientists heard 80 presentations in March. They endorsed an 881-page document, created by 40 authors with outstanding academic credentials, that challenges the most recent publication by the IPCC. The IPCC panel's report strongly concludes that man is causing global warming through the release of carbon dioxide.

Last year 60 German scientists sent a letter to Chancellor Angela Merkel urging her to “strongly reconsider” her position supporting man-made global warming. Sixty scientists in Canada took similar action. Recently, when the American Physical Society published its support for man-made global warming, 200 of its members objected and demanded that the membership be polled to determine the APS' true position.

What do the skeptics believe? First, they concur with the believers that the Earth has been warming since the end of a Little Ice Age around 1850. The cause of this warming is the question. Believers think the warming is man-made, while the skeptics believe the warming is natural and contributions from man are minimal and certainly not potentially catastrophic Ã la Al Gore.

Second, skeptics argue that CO2 is not a pollutant but vital for plant life. Numerous field experiments have confirmed that higher levels of CO2 are positive for agricultural productivity. Furthermore, carbon dioxide is a very minor greenhouse gas. More than 90 percent of the warming from greenhouse gases is caused by water vapor. If you are going to change the temperature of the globe, it must involve water vapor.

Third, and most important, skeptics believe that climate models are grossly overpredicting future warming from rising concentrations of carbon dioxide. We are being told that numerical models that cannot make accurate 5- to 10-day forecasts can be simplified and run forward for 100 years with results so reliable you can impose an economic disaster on the U.S. and the world.

The revelation of ClimateÂ gate occurs at a time when the accuracy of the climate models is being seriously questioned. Over the last decade Earth's temperature has not warmed, yet every model (there are many) predicted a significant increase in global temperatures for that time period. If the climate models cannot get it right for the past 10 years, why should we trust them for the next century?

Climategate reveals how predetermined political agendas shaped science rather than the other way around. It is high time to question the true agenda of the scientists now on the hot seat and to bring skeptics back into the public debate.

Neil Frank, who holds a Ph.D. from Florida State University in meteorology, was director of the National Hurricane Center (1974–87) and chief meteorologist at KHOU (Channel 11) until his retirement in 2008.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/editor...ok/6795858.html

webfact · January 4, 2010

after reading most of the topic and the very the last few postings I conclude to close this topic. No need to repeat the same arguments over and over again.

The subject was discussed more than 2years. That should be enough. "News" arn't running forever.

//CLOSED//

Sign In

Gulf Of Thailand Won't Rise With Global Warming, Expert Claims

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Posted Images

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Recently Browsing 0 members

Announcements

Topics

Popular Now