Scientists urge caution on global warming

202typical

Long Time Member
Messages
3,123
LAST EDITED ON Nov-25-08 AT 04:19PM (MST)[p]Looks like consensus is dissipating on global warming? LMAO....

POLITICO

Scientists urge caution on global warming
By: Erika Lovley
November 25, 2008 01:22 PM EST

Climate change skeptics on Capitol Hill are quietly watching a growing accumulation of global cooling science and other findings that could signal that the science behind global warming may still be too shaky to warrant cap-and-trade legislation.

While the new Obama administration promises aggressive, forward-thinking environmental policies, Weather Channel co-founder Joseph D?Aleo and other scientists are organizing lobbying efforts to take aim at the cap-and-trade bill that Democrats plan to unveil in January.

So far, members of Congress have not been keen to publicly back the global cooling theory. But both senators from Oklahoma, Republicans Tom Coburn and Jim Inhofe, have often expressed doubts about how much of a role man-made emissions play.

?We want the debate to be about science, not fear and hypocrisy. We hope next year?s wave of new politics means a return to science,? said Coburn aide John Hart. ?It's the old kind of politics that doesn't consider any dissenting opinions.?

The global cooling lobby?s challenge is enormous. Next year could be the unfriendliest yet for climate skeptics. Already, House Energy and Commerce Chairman John Dingell (D-Mich.) has lost his gavel, in part because his peers felt he was less than serious about tackling global warming.

The National Academy of Sciences and most major scientific bodies agree that global warming is caused by man-made carbon emissions. But a small, growing number of scientists, including D?Aleo, are questioning how quickly the warming is happening and whether humans are actually the leading cause.

Armed with statistics from the Goddard Institute for Space Studies and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration?s National Climate Data Center, D?Aleo reported in the 2009 Old Farmer?s Almanac that the U.S. annual mean temperature has fluctuated for decades and has only risen 0.21 degrees since 1930 ? which he says is caused by fluctuating solar activity levels and ocean temperatures, not carbon emissions.

Data from the same source shows that during five of the past seven decades, including this one, average U.S. temperatures have gone down. And the almanac predicted that the next year will see a period of cooling.

?We?re worried that people are too focused on carbon dioxide as the culprit,? D?Aleo said. ?Recent warming has stopped since 1998, and we want to stop draconian measures that will hurt already spiraling downward economics. We?re environmentalists and conservationists at heart, but we don't think that carbon is responsible for hurricanes.?

D?Aleo?s organization, the International Climate and Environmental Change Assessment Project, is collaborating on the campaign with the Cooler Heads Coalition, a subgroup of the National Consumer Coalition with members including Americans for Tax Reform, the National Center for Policy Analysis and Citizens for a Sound Economy.

More than 31,000 scientists across the world have signed the Global Warming Petition Project, a declaration started by a group of American scientists that states man?s impact on climate change can't be reasonably proven.

If the project gains traction, it might give skeptical lawmakers an additional weapon to fight cap-and-trade legislation to curtail greenhouse gases ? a move they worry could damage the already fragile economy. At the least, congressional aides say, it could caution additional lawmakers from rushing into a hasty piece of legislation.

Many Hill skeptics have varying opinions on whether the earth?s temperature is warming more slowly than some environmentalists predict and how much man is actually contributing to it.

Inhofe?s staff has been steadily compiling a list of global cooling findings. And aides report that they have received countless e-mails from scientists worldwide supporting the theory. While Inhofe hasn't indicated that he will move forward with the information anytime soon, his aides continue to compile it.

Republicans aren't the only ones who are wary of hastily passing a greenhouse gas bill. Ten Democrats wrote to Senate leaders earlier this year, citing economic concerns as a key reason why they didn't vote for the Senate?s cap-and-trade bill.

And despite Democrats? pickups in the Senate this fall, several of the new Democrats are from conservative, energy-producing states and may not be supportive, either.

But congressional aides say it could be a long wait before lawmakers are comfortable pushing science that contradicts the global warming theory. And until the lobby gains traction, skeptics plan to continue pushing their ideas by arguing for protection of the economy, where they hope to meet middle ground with global warming supporters.

?Never underestimate the ability of Congress to offer nonsolutions to problems that do not exist,? said Marc Morano, communications director for the Republicans on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. ?We could spend weeks arguing the mounting scientific evidence refuting man-made warming fears,? he added, ?but it's the economic arguments that have the most immediate impact.?

At the Cato Institute, senior fellow Patrick Michaels, a contributing author of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, said most of Washington is already too deeply entrenched in the global warming mantra to turn back.

?You can't expect the scientific community to now come to Washington and say this isn't a problem. Once the apocalypse begins to deliver research dollars, you don't want to reverse it,? said Michaels. ?Washington works by lurching from crisis to crisis.?

Despite the growing science, the world?s leading crusader on climate change, Al Gore, is unconcerned.

?Climate deniers fall into the same camp as people who still don't believe we landed on the moon,? said the former vice president's spokeswoman, Kalee Kreider. ?We don't think this should distract us from the reality.?
 
I have a bad feeling in 10 or 20 years teachers will be telling their students in class " it's hard to imagine kids but there were morons who though human activity had no effect on the climate back then, just like the people who thought the world was flat"

I hope I'm wrong.
 
The consensus if there is any, is that the human portion of the "Green House Effect" is 5.53%
That means 94.47% is caused by Mother nature.
So lets say we can TAX you two enough to shrink that 5.53% to say 2.53%. Do you two knuckle heads think that is going to stop global warming? Or will it be just enough to make you two FEEL better about your self?

Man made Global Warming is a scam.
 
Let me clarify what I mean about TAX. The Kyoto Protocol is what you two nuts would love to see the USA adopt. The Kyoto Protocol calls for mandatory carbon dioxide reductions of 30% from developed countries like the U.S. Reducing man-made CO2 emissions this much would have an undetectable effect on climate while having a devastating effect on the U.S. economy. Can you drive your car 30% less, reduce your winter heating 30%? Pay 20-50% more for everything from automobiles to zippers? And that is just a down payment, with more sacrifices to come later.

Such drastic measures, even if imposed equally on all countries around the world, would reduce total human greenhouse contributions from CO2 by about 0.035%.

This is much less than the natural variability of Earth's climate system!

While the greenhouse reductions would exact a high human price, in terms of sacrifices to our standard of living, they would yield statistically negligible results in terms of measurable impacts to climate change. There is no expectation that any statistically significant global warming reductions would come from the Kyoto Protocol.

It is meant to do nothing more than punish developed countries and redistribute wealth.
 
5.53% ? how do you figure there is a consensus on that? we can't say for sure if global warming is man caused but you have it down to a thousandth of a percent how much is, that's a good one.

I'm not in favor of the tax plan, if we can determine what the facts are it should be delt with on a manditory reduction basis with as little impact as possible to reach the goals set. 202 I'm a little like you, this planet only has to last as long as I do but don't rule out man made global warming just because you don't want to deal with it.
 
All I got to say on the subject is that Al Gore will now find another crusade to make money on. While he is walking to the bank with his millions he made on global warming due to the amount of outright suckers that fell for the B.S. without any real hard facts to back it up. It was a theory based on speculation that is now falling apart.
P.T. Barnum was right about suckers being born every minute!!!

RELH
 
The earths' human population is over 6 billion and rising. At a normal temperature of 98.6 degrees, that's a LOT of added heat!

Eel

President Obama and Congress should leave gun rights alone. It's above their pay grade.
 
202,

If you want to talk about a nut let's talk about you. You're the one who believes Government should own no land. In other words you want to sell off all public land. Talk about being taxed, we'd have to pay to hunt.

Nuts out,

BeanMan
 
I feel kinda like dude, it doesn't matter that much to me, another 25-30 years I won't care at all and it takes time for whats happening to really be felt, I don't take stock in what Jim Inhofe says at all. I'll admit to being a pessimist so I probably believe more in Jim Hansen and he says we are basically toast already, a good thing for you naysayers to look at would be the Intergovernmental Panel on climate change, the fourth report is on the web
 
I wonder how many of the nay sayers figure it doesn't matter because the rapture or whatever you call it is about due , they don't want to come right out and say it but they don't want to be inconvenienced by saving a planet who's day are numbered.

Once again I come back to the base problem I feel is responsible for 90% of the problems in the world, overpopulation. even if you cut the polution per person in half, which may not be enough anyway it what good does it do when you double the population.

I too feel it's a losing battle, not because I think the world is going to end but because I think man is too stupid to survive, he thinks all species exept himself need to be managed.
 
"5.53% ? how do you figure there is a consensus on that? we can't say for sure if global warming is man caused but you have it down to a thousandth of a percent how much is, that's a good one."

You obviously did not read what I said. Read it again Dude!

"You're the one who believes Government should own no land."

Bean, start a new thread if you want to argue gov. land ownership.

"Once again I come back to the base problem I feel is responsible for 90% of the problems in the world, overpopulation. even if you cut the polution per person in half, which may not be enough anyway it what good does it do when you double the population."

So whats your plan Dude?
 
Of course, the story is not over at this point. I have long been a skeptic of "human caused global warming." It isn't that I have solid, indisputable data to support my skepticism, but rather that I have observed too many dissonant indicators. What would a dissonant indicator be? When contrary voices are supressed vigorously that smacks of propaganda rather than scientific concensus. When anecdotal information is advanced as evidence without deep analysis and scrutiny, that too smells like a political agenda. When there is an appalling lack of reliable quantitization, that doesn't sound much like science to me. How much will temperatures rise? How much will the oceans rise? How much of the effect is human caused? Zero solid quantitization. And finally, I have felt that the science is pretty immature. Given the inability of climate scientists to explain known significant climate transients such as the 500 year long "Little Ice Age" and the 200 year long "Medieval Warming Epoch," why should we grant climate science enough maturity and understanding to speak authoritatively on human caused global warming?

So, the jury is still out. What I wonder is what price will be paid by people who stormed onto this "human caused global warming" bandwagon after all the dust settles, if this turns out to be silliness? Politicians may be given a pass, but how about the media? They are supposed to enlighten us and inform us. Can and should they be held accountable if this turns out to be mere smoke? More importantly, what about the "scientists?" These are supposed to be dispassionate seekers of truth, meekly submitting their earnest investigations to peer review to make a small but solid contribution to human knowledge? What kind of science is it if it is mere conjecture and selected "factoids?"
 
What you're saying is better to do nothing than to do something you didn't have to. global warming is real, a chimp can see that, if we can slow it we are obligated to. if we can't because it's natural then let the chips fall, I think we're a long ways from that conclusion much to your dismay.

Life would be a lot easier if everyone had a closed mind wouldn't it? little ol' me could never screw up a planet, that's preposterous, get out of here.
 
It's OK to discuss the issue, but the verdict is in. Man caused global warming is a done deal. Whether or not it's true is totally irrelevant at this point. Governments and the media have swallowed it hook, line, and sinker. It's the latest fashionable, hip issue of the "run bambi, it's man" crowd.

There is lots of evidence that the earth has not gotten warmer since 1998 so more and more you will hear the phrase "global climate change", as a way of hedging their bets.

What bothers me is that the people crying the loudest are the biggest individual offenders. They just preach it to justify their meaningless miserable lives.

Eel

President Obama and Congress should leave gun rights alone. It's above their pay grade.
 
>What you're saying is better to
>do nothing than to do
>something you didn't have to.
>global warming is real, a
>chimp can see that, if
>we can slow it we
>are obligated to. if we
>can't because it's natural then
>let the chips fall, I
>think we're a long ways
>from that conclusion much to
>your dismay.
>
> Life would be a lot
>easier if everyone had a
>closed mind wouldn't it? little
>ol' me could never screw
>up a planet, that's preposterous,
>get out of here.


Yes Dude the planet heats up and it cools down. Imagine that. In fact it has been doing just that for about a gozillion years. Guess what, man was nowhere to be found when it heated up the fist time.
Closed minds are thinking that this is man made. This planet has been through a hell of a lot more than what man can throw at it. Long after man is gone the planet will still be here my friend.
Don't get me wrong here, I am all for green technologies, I think its great. I just don't want some neer do well politician or liberal nut bar craming down my throat. I also do not want to be punished for being an American by the global comunity. For them it is all about taxing America. Believe me if the global warmers get their way that is exactly what will happen. How can you be for that?
eel is right about hedging their bets. You rarely if ever hear about global warming any more. The catch phrase is "global climate change." That way when the climate swings back around to being cold again these nuts can say "See I told you so"
Do you not see the absurdity of their argument?
By all accounts we are about to enter a time of cooling. Wonder what the climate change nuts will blame it on.......
 
If we do enter a time of cooling that should give us our answer, but cooling means the whole planet cools not just regional changes due to overall change. we'll see.

You do have a point, let future generations worry about it that saves us money and effort. the more I think about it the more I like it.
 
Hdude, I suppose if a person was worried that man is a major cause of global warming they should take charge and do the personal responsibility thing. The first thing you should do is recycle those old cars you have. They are inefficient and major polluters. Take them to the junk yard and insist they be crushed and recycled. Recycling is the way cool thing to do these days. Especially for those who really "care."

I mean, global warming might not be mans fault, but why take a chance, right?:)

Eel

President Obama and Congress should leave gun rights alone. It's above their pay grade.
 
Huntindude: That sounds so idiotic. "If we can slow it, we are obligated to." Doesn't it matter what fraction of the global warming we have any influence on? If the warming of the sun contributes 99% of observed global warming and human behavior contributes 1% of observed global warming, are we obligated to live in tents without air conditioning and without heating? See my points above about "quantitization." That view of "we can't just doing nothing" is vaccous and intellectually bankrupt.

The issue, as raised by the initial post on this thread, is that it is far from obvious that global warming of any stripe is occuring. The data, as suggested by this thread, indicates that global cooling has been going on. Did you not read the initial post?

The biggest problem with nut-case environmentalists, such as yourself, is that there is no serious science involved. It is without quantitization. It is not founded on any logic. "We can't just do nothing." OF COURSE WE CAN DO NOTHING!!! According to what logic is doing nothing NOT an option??? The idea that there is not a cost to "doing something" is ludicrous and false. Curtailing CO2 emissions has a substantial cost my friend. Before donning sackcloth and living in a tent, I want to see some serious science . . . which I have not seen. Review my post above. Al Gore isn't doing science. Factoids are not science. Bullying and threatening non-conforming colleagues isn't the way science is conducted. These are all, to the contrary, clear signs that global warming theory is not supported by science.
 
I believe we should follow the Martians example of what to do to combat global warming......

great post/pic, thanks for sharing

JB
 
16 degrees here this morning, supposed to have a high of 25 Saturday. global warming doesn't scare me one bit climate wise, it's the fear Texans might move north to escape the heat that makes me want to go green.
 
>16 degrees here this morning, supposed
>to have a high of
>25 Saturday. global warming doesn't
>scare me one bit climate
>wise, it's the fear Texans
>might move north to escape
>the heat that makes me
>want to go green.


Dude trust me Texans do not move North. We have it too good here. You have nothing to fear.

"On earth as it is in TEXAS"
 

Click-a-Pic ... Details & Bigger Photos
Back
Top Bottom