Global Warming? are humans to blame?

Ok, this is political- I guess...
but also, the issue rises above and beyond just this,

Primarily this is not intented to (just) start a debate.

the issue is relevent to just about every human activity, including boat design.
and with this forum and its members being concerned with water, the ocean, nature, and mans activity within such (not to mention a lot of other things), this issue has, and often does, arise here.

Often this issue arises across an array of threads, related usually but also probably off thread and argumentatively.
In this forum and in the wider community there is strong disagreement across this question.

So, for interest, maybe we can look at how the numbers break down in the members here.

Here is the (private) poll.

Do you believe:

a) global warming is occuring as a direct result of Human Activity.

b) IF gloabal warming is occurring it is as a result of non-human or natural processes.


This is simplified.
If you think humans are changing the climate, but not necessarily warming it, VOTE A.
If you think the climate is not changing, VOTE B.

Comments and discussion are of course welcome here.
Maybe for a little while at least, we can keep it out of the other threads.

Hans.

 

Mmmm ..... Tough questions..... I got to have more time to think Where is figgy when u need 'em?

 

What difference does it make which entity is causing it?

 

I don't mean to be trite,
but, a rather big difference I would think.
Hans.

 

Like what?

 

Do ya think maybe it's us?

Ice cores hold threat of climate timebomb

http://www.theage.com.au/news/world...limate-timebomb/2006/09/05/1157222131704.html

John Von Radowitz, London
September 6, 2006

A CLIMATE change timebomb may be just 10 years away from detonating, according to the latest global warming evidence.

Data from a deep ice core drilled out of the Antarctic permafrost reveals a shocking rate of change in carbon dioxide concentrations. The core, stretching through layers dating back 800,000 years, contains tiny bubbles of ancient air that can be analysed. Scientists who studied the samples found that they left no doubt as to the extent of the build-up of greenhouse gases. For most of the past 800,000 years, carbon dioxide levels had remained at between 180 and 300 parts per million (ppm) of air. Today they were at 380 ppm.

In the past, it had taken 1000 years for carbon dioxide to rise by 30 ppm during natural warming periods. According to the new measurements, the same level of increase has occurred in the past 17 years.

...

http://www.theage.com.au/news/world...limate-timebomb/2006/09/05/1157222131704.html

And in a more serious vein:

http://tailrank.com/posts/562949953911152/Ice_cores_show_co2_buildup

A White House spokesperson said the core samples hated freedom and loved the terrorists, reiterating their stance that the cost to business to remediate co2 buildup would be excessive. When asked to further explain the relationship between climate change and terrorism, and how, say, businesses in Manhattan would benefit if the streets were underwater, the spokesperson stated the president is committed to bringing democracy to Antarctica despite those who would force our great corporations like ExxonMobil and Halliburton to not make bloated windfall profits.

 

That article is a good example of the rampant sensationalism climatologists are spouting these days. A whole lot of alarmism with absolutely no data to back it up. You'll notice that the article doesn't mention exactly what will happen when the climate DOES start to warm up - they just make vague doomsday predictions and then leave it you your imagination; while failing to mention that nothing bad happened during the last several warming periods, all of which were hotter than now.

 

Due to scarier film of weather haywire, scientist get more fund to buy toys.

 

Yeah, that's exactly what I think, too.

 

Stonebreaker, I think you need to go check some facts. Try this link for a summary: http://www.thehcf.org/emaila1.html

From the link:

c. Have global temperatures already risen?

Yes. 2005 was the hottest year ever in the 100 years of recording the earth’s surface temperature, according to NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies. Worse, 2005 was a year without the El Nino effect, which usually contributes to warmer years. The temperature has risen 1 degree Fahrenheit in the last 30 years alone.

A mere 3-degree increase in Earth’s prevailing temperature would make the planet warmer than at any time in the last 125,000 years.

 

So........ are we dying? approx. 65 years to go would be fine... next gen problem?

 

I think that this quote should have been attributed to Fox News, or possibly CNN.

As for data, how about these? (http://www.thewe.cc/weplanet/news/air/co2_record_high_levels_in_the_atmosphere.htm)

The ice core was drilled from a thick area of ice on Antarctica known as Dome C. The core is nearly 3.2km long and reaches to a depth where air bubbles became trapped in ice that formed 800,000 years ago.

"It's from those air bubbles that we know for sure that carbon dioxide has increased by about 35 per cent in the past 200 years. Before that 200 years, which is when man's been influencing the atmosphere, it was pretty steady to within 5 per cent," Dr Wolff said.

The core shows that carbon dioxide was always between 180 parts per million (ppm) and 300 ppm during the 800,000 years. However, now it is 380 ppm. Methane was never higher than 750 parts per billion (ppb) in this timescale, but now it stands at 1,780 ppb.

I know, I know, you can come back with a White House quote to the contrary. And George never lies, does he?

BillyDoc

 

I read some where,--please dont ask where I cant remember, that at the turn of last century ie 1900 there was a lot of methane from animals. Horses were the transport of the day and in big cities around the world was horses manure,--apparantly it was every where and the streets stunk of it.
The plains of America had huge herds of Buffalo along with Africa having herds of--of everything-- unimaginable today.

Would it not seem logical to assume also that millions of years ago there would have been more rotting corpes and more manure. Not to mention the huge forests and swamps also in decay resulting in the fosil fuel we so crave for today.

All I am saying is methane isnt new to the planet. If methane is responsable for the hole in the ozone layer I dont think we can blame it on busted fridges.

 

Hey Westlawn,

The timeline just keeps shrinking as more data comes in. The article above talks about ten years to the "tripping point" (which is when all Hell will probably break loose).

I have the advantage on you there, I think, because I'm already 63 years old and won't lose all that much time.

BillyDoc

 

Very funny, I was ticking you guys into frienzi backing up the issue, OF COURSE I believe it. To profit from LNG gas under the layer seem to give off more CO2. The biggest producer is Russia and the rest of the world. There is alot of Fresh CO2 under our feet to be let loose into the OZONE anyway. Is it 20% LNG : 80%n CO2