Global Warming: fact or fiction?

[joejv4]

This topic will likely have some very polarized points of view, however, I am hoping it generates a good healthy exchange.

My personal thought on Global Warming, now called Climate Change because we're no longer sure that the planet is warming, but "we must do something to protect the environment for the polar bears" is nothing more than politics at its worst.

During the 1970's, the big scare went out that the planet was cooling and we were headed into the next glaciation. In 30 years, we suddenly went from cooling to warming.

Now, why do I not buy into what we're being told by the likes of former Vice President Al Gore and the UN sponsored IPCC? There are multiple reasons.

1) Lack of data.
- "Oh, but they have tons of data!!!"
- NO, "they" don't. How long have we had the ability to measure surface temperatures on a "global" scale? Maybe 50 years, and those measurements have only started becoming relatively accurate and timely within the last 25 - 30 years. So, armed with this knowledge, what are the IPCC-types using for a baseline? Answer: A guess and some computer models.

- "But there's the evidence from the ice cores!!!"
- Ummmm, last I checked, "ice" exists at temperatures at or below 32 F or 0 C. How does ice from either of the polar regions tell us what the temperature was in Kansas 5000 years ago? It doesn't. It tells us that the core site was cold enough for ice and snow 5000 years ago. It tells us some of what the content of the atmosphere was 5000 years ago at the site of the core sample. It even tells us how much snow fell at the site of the core sample 5000 years ago, but it does not tell us the average global serface temperature (no matter how much the global warming proponents want to "infer" from what the ice contains)

-"The tree ring evidence proves it!"
-Somehow, I can't get myself to make a leap to global warming based on an analysis of the rings of three "cherry-picked" trees from Siberia. On top of the fact that since they came from one region, they demonstrate "weather" not "climate"

-"There is data that proves that the mean global surface temperature has risen in the last 20 years!"
-Yep, it's gone up a whopping fraction of one degree. What does that tell me? Not much of anything since it does not show any clear long-term trend - and again, there is the question of what is being used for a baseline. Pick a year with a strong El Nino for a baseline - low and behold, the mean global surface temperature has decreased!!!!!

-"But the greenhouse effect! Everybody knows how greenhouses work"
-Fortunately we don't live in a greenhouse. The atmosphere does not behave like a greenhouse. A greenhouse is a controlled environment, where our atmosphere is anything but controlled. There are so many variables that play in the way that our atmosphere behaves that the whole notion of applying "the greenhouse effect" to it, is a load of... nonsense.

2) Politics and Science should not mix.
A scientist that has been given a grant by politicians to "Study Global Warming", must start with the premise that global warming is a fact - if they want continued funding (read - employment).

A thought to ponder: The notion of "Global Warming" followed on the heels of the end of the Cold War. For 40 years, governments used the fear of MAD (Mutual Assured Destruction) to influence and to some extent control their citizens. Fear is a powerful tool for a government, be it a real fear or one manufactured for that sole purpose. Suddenly, when the Berlin Wall fell, the MAD mechanism for controlling people went away, and the current terrorist threat had not fully developed. What could governments do to instill fear in their populations and thus exert their wills (and more importantly, political agendas) on the masses? Hmmm, the environment is a good one - in fact it's an awesome one!!! Think about it. Fear of the end of the world, driven by SUV's and factories. And even better, since we're talking about saving our planet for our grandchildren, who will argue against the need to go "green". We can push all sorts of political agendas, all in the name of saving the planet!!!! Eureka! We've discovered the Holy Grail for political leverage!!!!! Now, lets fund some struggling science programs with big money to study "Global Warming". Notice the choice of words. I didn't say "study global climate trends", and that's the same way that governments approached the use of Global Warming as their instrument of control. By the time the IPCC was assembled by the UN, the notion of Global Warming was already a foregone conclusion, and it became the mission of the IPCC to assemble data to support Global Warming and to discount data that runs contrary to it.

3) We do not have the technology to accurately model climate. Think of it this way. Today's meteorologists have continuous feeds of weather data that they feed into their computer models to forecast the weather. How accurate is your local weather forecast? One day out, pretty good - in fact, generally speaking, they are able to fairly accurately forecast what will be happening down to a given 8 hour period of the day. Pretty impressive... until we start to look at two days out, three days out, and the week-ahead forecasts. How accurate are those forecasts? Not very accurate. They are able to give you a temperature range and a percent chance of percipitation, but as the day draws closer, the forecast almost always changes. If we can not predict the weather for a specific locale, one week out, how am I to believe that anybody can predict the climate of the entire planet over the next 5, 10, or 20 years?!

Computer models are only as accurate as the data that is fed to them. In the case of local weather forecasting, very accurate real-time data is constantly fed into these models - and the still manage to get it wrong. How is it, then, that the Climate Change models can be right - when they utilize some real-time, accurate data, coupled with a lot of inferred, possibly incorrect data, and have no way to account for the complexity of the world wide weather patterns or variability in the atmosphere itself? Again, there is also the question of what do these models use for a baseline. Short answer - they can not, with any statistically relevance, predict anything.

That's my quick perspective on Global Warming. What is yours, and why?

[Mind-Designers]

Well i think is a fact.
Because There is a Global warming atm, but there is a professor that say that whe warm up now and later like maby 100 or 100 years away the earth will cool down to a iceage and after the iceage the earth will warm up again.

Maby hi is right or maby hi is wrong.

[farscapeone]

Whatever it is I don't think it's that much important. If we are changing this planet to a worse environment for us that's means we don't deserve to live here. That is true because we will suffer form every change we made and eventually we will destroy ourselves if we don't do something. But rest assure, this planet will continue to live. This climate change everybody is talking about is not the first one, nor it will be a last one on this planet.

Life found the way to deal with almost any challenge, the question is, can we?

[fractalfeline]

Huh! Whatever happened to the old link re: global warming? I don't see it anymore. I'd link it if I could find it.

[silkje]

Interesting points! I think my take is the climate change we are going through is a natural one.. although i am willing to except that due to us dominating most of the planet (together with our pollutants) there is a percentage that we are adding to make it 'unnatural'. I can go green but i think there should be much more pressure on BIG businesses.

I have often wondered about the global warming media agenda, just seems weird how countries around the world would rather gather and talk about the weather than some real issues (war or poverty). :nuts:

[joejv4]

Yes, there are certainly more important things to deal with than Global Warming. As for political agendas that are being promoted by the Global Warming scare tactic, I'd say the biggest is an attempt to hurt capitalism and free-market economies - promoting a socialism and redistribution of wealth.

The climate of this planet has always been in change, and there isn't anything that the human race can do about it one way or another. If the climate is indeed warming a little, I wouldn't be surprised, since the last ice age was only 10K years ago and we may very well still be on our way out of it... OR, we could be getting ready to begin the next ice age. Nobody knows, and that is why the term "Global Warming" has gone by the wayside and the new term for this scare tactic is "Climate Change". Essentially the politically driven pseudo-science that the climate change scare tactic is based on, tells us that we don't know if the climate warming or cooling. If the planet is warming (or cooling) it is not because I drive an Explorer instead of a Prius, it's because the Earth's climate is always changing and it has shown to be a cyclical thing, not an anthropogenic (man-made) thing.

[silkje]

It certainly is a lot to think about. I guess one positive about the whole climate change story is that its not so much about the individual but about the whole. In particular over population and people moving to densely populated areas resulting in higher energy footprints? Unfortunatly there are few things that can be done about the former but can be seen in motion (war or even the legality of smoking) but the latter is a group effort. However it would be fairer to see more being done by big industry and its like rather than individuals.

The example of what car being driven is a typical one, but change begins with you. Whether you want to change is up to you.

Surely if our populations continue to grow as it is its only a matter of time before later generations feel its repercussions, in what form i honestly do not know.. perhaps in air quality or temperature changes. i certainly do not worry about a "day after tomorrow" or "2012" movie scenario

More people consume, more people waste and what happens to the planet? :dunno:

[ozcorps]

LOl i feel its Here now, i have had the coldest winter since i have been in USA for 15 years its snowed 4 times for an area that mostly only see's snow once,

what gets me though i know i will get flak for this but what the hell.
Why are those setting global rules are the same Ppl who RAPED the earth growing up.
things for me now are so Law based and Earth friendly some days i wish i was back in the days of the wild west were doing things like others didn't included being FORCED to separate my trash due to me being fined for that WHEN i dont make a cent off of doing it anyways and the County makes all the recycling funds.

call it moaning in today's standards, but i feel i didn't CREATE this CRAPy situation so why do we have to pay for our forefathers stupidity. anyways before anyone says i do do green friendly things and yes i hope the world goes on without any 2012 situation's for my sons sake, who is 2 and has a long life ahead but damn.

anyhow thanks for reading

[sambosulker]

Global warming, possibly real. Man made? No...

After climategate revealed that the 43 scientists that provide the majority of climate change data the UN and Al Gore qote from lie, use tricks to "hide the decline", I think its pretty clear that global warming is being used as a reason for massive world wide taxation.

I want a clean environment, and I think the best way to do this is respect property rights - you cant pollute my property, and if I can prove you have I can sue you - but global taxation and world authority is the answer to nothing.

[vishal]

I tthink its a FACT and it has to be