Global Warming? are humans to blame?

Discussion in 'All Things Boats & Boating' started by hansp77, Sep 11, 2006.

?

Do you believe

  1. Global Warming is occuring as a direct result of Human Activity.

    106 vote(s)
    51.7%
  2. IF Gloabal Warming is occurring it is as a result of Non-Human or Natural Processes.

    99 vote(s)
    48.3%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Boston

    Boston Previous Member

    maybe if you were to open your mind a little all that BS might find a way to escape, at which point you might be able to comprehend the issues without missing so much of the discussion you end up making nothing but banal comments.

    I notice you very carefully avoid discussing any of the science involved Hoyt. Ever think to ask yourself why that is. Might also want to consider that the same arguments the deniers are trying to foist off on Al Gore's work seem to fit the deniers argument itself just fine. Could be something to that also. Read that twice if you have to, two simple questions; you very carefully avoid discussing any of the science involved Hoyt. Ever think to ask yourself why that is. Might also want to consider that the same arguments the deniers are trying to foist off on Al Gore's work seem to fit the deniers argument itself just fine.

    best of luck
    not that I'm expecting any form of intelligent response or anything, but still
    best of luck.

    B
     
  2. hoytedow
    Joined: Sep 2009
    Posts: 5,857
    Likes: 400, Points: 93, Legacy Rep: 2489
    Location: Control Group

    hoytedow Carbon Based Life Form

    I don't need a scientific analysis to be done to know what I am smelling from your posts. Forget about opening the mind, I need to open a window!
     
  3. Boston

    Boston Previous Member

    well I nailed that one now didn't I

    Always best of avoid those pesky realities found within the science and stick to the remedial responses eh. I notice you never did comment on the Berkly study funded by the deniers which found agreement with the three previous studies, all in favor of the theory of rapid global climate shift.

    more pesky science that put an end to all those petty complaints about the temp records

    Deal is you have no intelligent response because you simply don't want to learn what you don't want to know.


    cheers
    B
     
  4. frasco
    Joined: Jun 2011
    Posts: 41
    Likes: 1, Points: 8, Legacy Rep: 15
    Location: Finland

    frasco Junior Member

    I'd like to vote on both alternatives.
     
  5. Boston

    Boston Previous Member

    why is that Frasco
     
  6. frasco
    Joined: Jun 2011
    Posts: 41
    Likes: 1, Points: 8, Legacy Rep: 15
    Location: Finland

    frasco Junior Member

    No scientific reason (haven't read but the first page of the thread either) but I have a feeling that "global warming" is a product of both humans and mother nature's normal cycles. Even if it's mainly a natural cycle we still make an impact with what we do. And from what I know we are moving either from or towards another ice age at any given time so we can't really exclude that alternative either (unless we're going the "wrong way" :)).
     
  7. Boston

    Boston Previous Member

    well, read away. I think you'll find it chalk full of every denialist argument you can think of. I'd actually have to recommend going to the Realclimate site run by G Schmidt if you want a more well rounded read. Might save you a lot of confusion, think of it like trying to learn math from a room full of folks who are arguing 1+1. Might be better to hit up a climate scientist who's blog comes straight from the top. Might even get to meet some of the real players in the game.

    http://www.google.com/url?q=http://...MQFjAB&usg=AFQjCNFGgMHNuzIYCAh0fjiLsTiU5BS5eA

    If your curious about our more recent discussion here and what the so called Medieval Warm Period is all about you might try this link http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004/12/myths-vs-fact-regarding-the-hockey-stick/ As it goes over some of the more egregious misconceptions about the issue. Basically it was a regional fluctuation in weather that doesn't show up in climate studies very well simply because as regional variations (Europe mostly ) are averaged out with all other regions it just doesn't show up as much on the global data pool.
     
  8. Boston

    Boston Previous Member

    where'd your ringer go Hoyt :p
     
  9. hoytedow
    Joined: Sep 2009
    Posts: 5,857
    Likes: 400, Points: 93, Legacy Rep: 2489
    Location: Control Group

    hoytedow Carbon Based Life Form

    Okay, I'm back. Had to go row the galley. If I had opened the window my pigeons would have gotten out.

    Blah.
     
    1 person likes this.
  10. hoytedow
    Joined: Sep 2009
    Posts: 5,857
    Likes: 400, Points: 93, Legacy Rep: 2489
    Location: Control Group

    hoytedow Carbon Based Life Form

  11. Climatesanity
    Joined: Nov 2011
    Posts: 0
    Likes: 1, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 27
    Location: colorado

    Climatesanity New Member

    Boston says the following...

    Ice core data is subject to an issue of ice permeability, with fossil atmosphere lagging the age of ice by as much as 7k year. Please see, http://www.pnas.org/content/94/16/8343.full

    Quote:
    The processes affecting gases in ice cores need to be taken into account in reconstructions of the composition of the past atmosphere. First, measured concentrations of gases in ice cores and firn air need to be corrected for effects of gravitational fractionation and, where appropriate, thermal fractionation. Second, gas records are useful only when dated absolutely or on a time scale common to other records. Because bubbles close at depths of 40–120 m, gases are younger than the ice enclosing them. The gas age–ice age difference (Δage) is as great as 7 kyr in glacial ice from Vostok; it is as low as 30 yr in the rapidly accumulating Antarctic core DE 08. There are substantial uncertainties associated with Δage, limiting our ability to interpret some records. This is not a problem when reconstructing the anthropogenic transient from ice core studies, because one can align the recent part of ice core records with direct observations and assume that Δage is constant below the interval of overlap.

    I provided (on my web page) several sources that indicate the CO2 lags temperature during the Pleistocene and Holocene as indicated by ice core data. The above quote that Boston provided is supposed to cast doubt on that point.

    It is good and appropriate the Boston provided a link to the source (PNAS) of his quote. For those BoadDesign readers who did not check the source, here is a pertinent point: this paper is from 1997. The sources that I provided are all subseqeunt to Boston's source. Each of the sources that I provided either explicitly or implicity took Bender (Boston's source) into account.

    For your reading pleasure, here are the sources that I provided...

    1. Hubertus Fischer (1999)(Scripps Institution of Oceanography) wrote about "Ice core records of Atmospheric CO2 Around the Last Three Glacial Terminations", in the Journal Science and concluded “High resolution records from Antarctic ice cores sow that carbon dioxide concentrations increased… 600 ± 400 years after the warming…” That is, as the last three ice ages ended and temperatures started rising, the CO2 lagged behind the temperature rise, indicating that CO2 was not the primary driver of temperature rise.

    "Ice core records of Atmospheric CO2 Around the Last Three Glacial Terminations," Science 12 March 1999: Vol. 283 no. 5408 pp. 1712-1714

    2. "The timing between CO2 and temperature rise for climate transitions was also studied by Manfred Mudelsee of the Institute of Meteorology at the University of Leipzig. He reported his findings in the Quaternary Science Reviews in 2001. He used a “lagged, generalized least-squares regression” technique to conclude that the Vostok ice records show “CO2 variations lag behind atmospheric temperature changes in the Southern Hemisphere by 1.3 ± 1.0 ka.”

    "The phase relations among atmospheric CO2 content, temperature
    and global ice volume over the past 420 ka," Quaternary Science Reviews 20 (2001) 583-589

    3. More recently Lowell Stott (2007) from the department of Earth Sciences at the University of Southern California wrote about the end of the last ice age in the Journal Science. He points out that temperature led “the rise of in atmospheric CO2 and tropical surface ocean warming by ~1000 years.” He explains the following sequence of events: 1. “The trigger for the initial deglacial warming around Antarctica was the change in solar insolation over the Southern Ocean during austral spring that influenced the retreat of sea ice.” 2. “Retreating sea-ice would have led to enhanced Ekman transport in the Southern Ocean and decreased stratification due to stronger air-sea fluxes. 3. “These forcings promoted enhanced ventilation of the deep sea and subsequent rise in atmospheric CO2.”

    "Southern Hemisphere and Deep-Sea Warming Led Deglacial Atmospheric CO2 Rise and Tropical Warming,"Science 19 October 2007: Vol. 318 no. 5849 pp. 435-438

    More to come

    Best Regards,
    Tom Moriarty
    Senior Scientist, National Renewable Energy Laboratory
    ClimateSanity
     
  12. Climatesanity
    Joined: Nov 2011
    Posts: 0
    Likes: 1, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 27
    Location: colorado

    Climatesanity New Member

    In the case of Gore's "An Inconveinient Truth," Boston provides the following quote...

    Quote:
    "Mr Justice Burton said he had no complaint about Gore's central thesis that climate change was happening and was being driven by emissions from humans. However, the judge said nine statements in the film were not supported by mainstream scientific consensus. "

    Here is a direct quote from Burton...

    “Some of the errors by Mr Gore in AIT do arise in the context of alarmism and exaggeration in support of his political thesis.”
    British High Court Justice Michael Burton, 2007 Ruling

    Tom Moriarty
    ClimateSanity
     
  13. hoytedow
    Joined: Sep 2009
    Posts: 5,857
    Likes: 400, Points: 93, Legacy Rep: 2489
    Location: Control Group

    hoytedow Carbon Based Life Form

    There is your science, Boston, thanks to Climatesanity.

    Blah.
     
  14. Climatesanity
    Joined: Nov 2011
    Posts: 0
    Likes: 1, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 27
    Location: colorado

    Climatesanity New Member

    on 11-05-2011, 11:53 AM Boston attempted to refute my criticism of Gore's account of Hurricane Katrina and increasing hurricane danger. He wrote...

    The link that he provides refers for Kevin Trenberth, from NCAR.

    At the time of Katrina and for a while afterwards, Kevin Trenberth was a big proponent of the "Accumulated Cyclone Energy" (ACE) index. This is a measure of the amount of energy dissipated by cyclones over the entire planet, or some part of the planet. In the June 17th, 2005 issue of Science he said…

    At that time he used the ACE to bolster his argument that “Trends in human-influenced environmental changes are now evident in hurricane regions.” This is what the satellite derived ACE looked like in 2005, about the time of Katrina…

    [​IMG]

    For some reason, he left the ACE data out of his 2007 Scientific American article. Maybe because when he wrote his article in 2007 it looked like this…

    [​IMG]

    These days he is strangely silent about the ACE index. Maybe it is because is looks like this...

    [​IMG]

    If interested you can see the above graphs in context here.

    Reiterating, Boston said of Gore's Katrina analysis...


    Best Regards
    Tom Moriarty
    ClimateSanity
     

  15. Climatesanity
    Joined: Nov 2011
    Posts: 0
    Likes: 1, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 27
    Location: colorado

    Climatesanity New Member

    At 11:02 am on 11/7/11 Boston said the following...

    Boston, I thought you sounded line an aficionado of RealClimate. Indeed, they are "the real players in the game." They are very classy folks over there. Here is a comment that I posted at RealClimate last year:

    [​IMG]

    As you can see, my comment was technical in nature and deserved a thoughful response. You can read all about their response here.

    Best Regards,
    ClimateSanity
     
Loading...
Forum posts represent the experience, opinion, and view of individual users. Boat Design Net does not necessarily endorse nor share the view of each individual post.
When making potentially dangerous or financial decisions, always employ and consult appropriate professionals. Your circumstances or experience may be different.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.