Global Warming? are humans to blame?

no wheel spinning here brother
if you go back in the threads you will find all the data you need to ignore
in order to keep up the beliefs that will sink us all in the end
at least we managed to agree on something though

we are killing the oceans
and fast running out of fish

funny thing about that admission though
its the oceans that drive the weather to a large degree
so how can you agree that we're killing the oceans
and yet disagree that we're changing the weather
seems kinda counter intuitive not to put the two together

anyway
speaking of not spinning my wheels
I think Ill just bow out again
just thought Ild drop in and see were the skid marks had gone
love
B

 

These are separate issues

AGW theory states that anthropogenic CO2 liberated from 'fossil' fuels is raising atmospheric CO2 levels. Meanwhile plankton is a key part of the oceanic CO2 solubility pump system, which likely establishes the 'set point' of CO2 in the atmosphere. No one is saying anywhere that plankton is getting scarce, notwithstanding what is happening to edible fish, so that system still functions to either increase or decrease atmospheric CO2, as the oceanic temperature dictates. Right now CO2 is rising because of rising ocean temperatures and the solubility pump responding to that rise; atmospheric CO2 is but a lagging proxy.

This system is quite indifferent to our puny CO2 contributions, having already the task of coping with amounts at least two orders of magnitude larger than the most pessimistic estimates of anthropogenic emissions.

Got it?

Jimbo

 

Who'll stop the rain?!!

I can remember, when I was younger; seeing weather maps depicting constant trains of rain storms moving eastward from the South American Continent. They're largely gone now. Gone along with the rain forests. There used to be nearly constant cloud cover over the whole area. No wonder El Nino currents arise during the hotter summers. Constant storms had to have had a cooling effect on the ocean, at least near the surface and right there in the very place where El Nino events occur. "Let's slash and burn the rain forests!" Who's bright idea was that? Maybe we should seed the place with CUDZU to make it green again.

 

One inch of frost in North Thailand,--nothing new but a bit early and severe.

At 13 degrees latitude I would not expect to be sat outside freezing my nuts off as I was last week. This is not normal and I have not seen this before.

 

This was (is) the 'bright' idea of hungry people wishing to grow crops. It's funny how logging gets the blame though. You call in the loggers when you want land cleared for farming. This is why 'high yield' farming methods are a KEY factor in the preservation of forests worldwide, especially in the coming decades. You'd think that 'environmentalists' would welcome such farming methods, but you'd be wrong. How they expect all those people to eat, I do not know; they don't know (or care ) either.

environMENTALists


Jimbo

 

wanna bet
what data did you ignore to come up with that conclusion
go look for sea bird die offs in the last few years along the west coast
and there causes before you make such inaccurate assumptions
or the reduction in plankton in anoxic zones
that are inarguable caused by man
or the ice born planktons and there reduced numbers based on a reduction of ice
home work Jim
do some homework
love
B

 

You are being selective (biased) in your reporting. I found MORE articles on plankton blooms and thriving plankton populations than on any supposed scarcity. Anyone reading this thread is invited to do a search on the terms "palnkton thriving" and see what you get. Don't take it from me, see for yourself.

Meanwhile, Boston can try to answer why the following huge holes exist in his favorite apocalyptic theory and just how he is going to explain them away:

Atmospheric CO2 was already increasing before significant anthropogenic releases.

The atmosphere was already warming before significant anthropogenic CO2 releases.

Alarming warming is only evident in the surface measurements; the more accurate satellite data show no significant warming (The surface measurement system is known to be in serious state of disrepair/nonconformity)

NO warming trend can be observed in the tropical troposphere, which is the 'gold standard' of greenhouse warming; theory and modeling predicts that there should be UNMISTAKABLE warming in this strata, yet none exists.

If you can't come up with good explanations for these serious problems with the theory, then maybe it's because the theory does not explain what's going on; that it's a BAD theory, one that should be discarded in favor of one that better explains what we are observing.

And PLEASE don't come up with stuff from the 'rathole'; those guys have been caught with their hand in the cookie jar more than once. Their backpedaling on the 'hottest decade' issue alone should give you pause (though it prob'ly doesn't )


To quote someone else's signature:

You entitled to your own beliefs, but not your own facts

Jimbo

 

Everbody is quoting this that and the other when ALL of it is unknown or has been taken from a newspaper.

I dont trust no-one any more, but when my own **** are freezing off in Thailand in Nov then I know that is sure 100%. After 20 years I have never shed a goose bump in this country ever.

 

the following should end the debate that there is a growing number of climate scientist turning skeptics
the data clearly shows
there is a growing number who are believers
an overwhelming number 97% believe global average temp has increased while 84% believe this warming is based on human activity
only 5% believing humans are not to blame
with the remaining undecided

if anyone questions those numbers as representing a consensus
then my next post will be the definition of a consensus

(some said the following to which I just had to respond)

if you dig through you will find a video I posted hosted by the professor emeritus of scripts oceanographic institute on the state of the oceans

all the trends you need to scare the skepticism out of you are there
if you want to

while Ill grant you Guillermo is a fine debater and presents a polite and well thought out argument although I believe representing mostly the same kind of anomalous data that exists in any scientific study
Jim blatantly uses the same discredited sources and obvious industry cronies as references and has completely ignored the vast amount of data from accredited sources, instead simply repeating the same old tired complaints
about the same old data he has problems with
it didnt take long before I lost interest in the tedium finding no reasonable argument in an oft repeated diatribe

frankly I have better things to do with my time and time is why I stepped out of this unscientific debate long ago
funny but having dropped back in to see who was still hard at it I find the same few people with the same old tired arguments

to which my previous conclusion having given the skeptics a chance to explain there position stands

love B

 

Well well well, still going I see!

 

cant help but notice absolutely no coherent argument to the contrary but instead Im expected to respond to a this kind of childish avoidance to discuss and learn about climate change

yes I avoid the term debate because the consensus is incredibly clear
the debate was over long ago and at this point its a simple mater of education
but
as Jerry said a long while back

you aint going to learn
what you dont want to know

cheers
B

Jim sorry buddy but nearly every claim you make in your previous is a a construct of the disinformation campaign
a campaign designed by the tobacco corporations and picked up by the energy industry's PR people
after all the art of agnotology is well known to be only a delaying tactic
in this case
delaying the prognosis of lung cancer for the world
and we all know that the longer you wait for treatment
the less your chances of survival are

same holds true with the environment
its just as much a living organism as its more mobile components are
the GIA principal
you might check it out if you get the time
B

 

bs bs bs bs bs bs bs bs bs bs bs bs bs bs bs bs bs bs bs bs bs bs bs bs bs bs bs bs bs.

There is no agw!

 

Psssst wanna buy a bs meter?

 

for my birthday and I thought I'd stop in for a laugh
I gotta hand it to you guys.
pretty funny that you still present no coherent counter theory to Rapid Global Climate Change
must be that you just
dont have one

but you are making progress
at least you two seem to have given up on presenting the energy industry PR campaigns disinformation

and that is a nice gift indeed
I was getting tired of the same guys who wrote for the tobacco industries PR campaign being presented as if they were scientists

cheers
B

 

HAPPY BORN DAY TO boston, happy born day to you.... I'd blow you a kiss, if only to make mark jealous, but I am not that kind of person...

Enjoy, the next one is due in 364 days - - yes - - leap year is 2012? when you will have to leap into building your boat...