JPF Home Page Forums Who is minding the store?

And even if it didn't freeze somewhere else, it would still be cold. Yes, Ray - complicates the picture.

An analogy that I sometimes used to explain (to myself, anyway)how global warming might lead to local cooling is this: Take an ice cube and hold it near a hot lamp. Hold your hand under it and collect the water. Is the water cold or hot?

As I said though, I'm not an expert.......

Scott

Scott
So I think we do agree, somewhat. It will happen with or without man but man can (and probably is) "magnifying" or "accelerating" the process?

That does not mean Global warming is caused by man. Only that man can have an impact on the time line.
Yes, I do believe we can change the time line.

People get hung up on splitting hairs.

This is my understanding of this Ice Age.
Folks think we had an Ice age "11,000" years ago. We had an Ice age about 2.5 Million years ago and we are still in it.
The current Glaciation period ended 11,000 years ago and the Glaciers started receding. They are still receding. Glaciation happens at fairly regular intervals. I think I read every 100,000 years but I might be wrong on that one.

BTW Sea levels 11,000 years ago were about 400 feet lower than they are now. California was in the Midwest, LOL.
The sea levels have steadily risen over the last 11,000 years with a few short pauses.

As far as the Atlantic Cod goes.
Well, as Mr. Spock says.
"Hunting a species to extinction is Illogical"

We have done that many times. The Whitetail deer and Buffalo are typical examples of hunting a species to NEAR extinction. And it was done in a very short period of time.If man had not interfered and stopped it they would be gone forever. Fortunately we stopped just in time. Not so I fear with the Cod. I think they are gone for good.

Maybe a little less than one dinosaur fart.

Yes, those 3,100 scientists are a myth in any way that has a bearing on evidence of climate change.

There was a petition -- do you know who sent it out? Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine. A six-man operation that has also published creationism books, among other things. The word 'science' in their title is a great example of irony.

Who "signed" it (including Star Wars characters, Hawkeye Pierce and Frank Burns, and one Spice Girl). How many were climate scientists?

That it was accompanied by a thoroughly debunked "paper" on evidence of global warming that was published by a "peer-reviewed" journal that has printed articles claiming that HIV doesn't cause AIDS and “humanists” have conspired to replace the “creation religion of Jehovah” with evolution. Science?

That it was sent with an opinion piece by a Dr. Frank Seitz, who was president of the National Academy of Sciences in the 1960s, (although not an expert on climate at all) on letterhead suggesting the NAS endorsed it (and disagreed with ICCP.)

That the NAE went to great lengths to clarify that it does agree with IPCC that global warming in this century is real and "very likely man-caused."

That Seitz is or has been the chairman or on the board of four organizations that deny man-made greenhouse gases have any effect on the climate and are funded by oil companies?

You don't trust Gore, but cite the OISM? Jebus Plebus.

No one says man is "ruining" the climate. That doesn't really mean anything. The climate is changing -- way too quickly to be like any "natural" process in the past -- and our infrastructure and commerce, and disease control, etc, is built on the "unchanged" climate. That's the danger.

God might save us all, I suppose. But the idea reminds me of a Doobie Brothers song called "How Do Those Fools Survive," in which God says mankind is just "giving up their blame to me."

I know a guy that works at our local Coal fired power plant--he said if the "cap And trade" is passed our power bills will go up $2000.00 per year per household--that's an additional $166.00 a month--my power bill runs about $250 a month now. the power plant is only 30 miles from my house and I will be paying @ $416 a month for electricity--I'll have to pull the plug.
everything that is produced will go up.
Welcome to big out of control government.

Forgetting all the scientist's and non scientist's and the thousands of reports for and against Global warming let me try it this way.
I do not believe man is not contributing to climate change. But it is going to happen with or without us.
I just don't see any reason to make Al Gore a rich man as it happens.
Take note of the last sentence in bold and underlined. If you can show evidence refuting this I'd like to see it.

Interglacials during the Pleistocene

During the 2.5 million year span of the Pleistocene, numerous glacials, or significant advances of continental ice sheets in North America and Europe have occurred at intervals of approximately 40,000 to 100,000 years. These long glacial periods were separated by more temperate and shorter interglacials.

During the interglacials, one of which we are in now, the climate warmed to more or less present day temperatures and the tundra receded polewards following the ice sheets. Forests returned to areas that once supported the tundra vegetation. Traditionally, interglacials have been identified on land or in shallow epicontinental seas by their paleontology. Floral and faunal remains of species pointing to temperate climate and indicating a specific age are used to identify particular interglacials. Most used are mammalian and molluscan species, pollen and plant macro-remains (seeds and fruits). However, many other fossil remains may be helpful: insects, ostracods, foraminifera, diatoms, etc. More recently, ice cores and ocean sediment cores have provided more quantitative and better dated evidence for temperatures and total ice volumes.

Interglacials are a useful tool for geological mapping and also for anthropologists, as they can be used as a dating method for hominid fossils.[1]

Brief periods of milder climate that occurred during the last glacial are called interstadials. Most (not all) interstadials are shorter than interglacials. Interstadial climate may have been relatively warm but this is not necessarily so. Because the colder periods (stadials) have often been very dry, wetter (so not necessarily warmer) periods have been registrated in the sedimentary record as interstadials as well.

The oxygen isotope ratio obtained from deep sea cores and a proxy for average global temperature, is an important source of information about changes in the climate of the earth.

Interglacial optimum

An interglacial optimum, or climatic optimum of an interglacial, is the period within an interglacial that experienced the most 'favourable' climate that occurred during that interglacial, often during the middle part. The climatic optimum of an interglacial follows, and is followed by, phases that are within the same interglacial and that experienced a less favourable climate (but nevertheless a 'better' climate than during the preceding/succeeding glacials). During an interglacial optimum, sea levels rise to their highest values, but not necessarily exactly at the same time as the climatic optimum.

In the present interglacial, the Holocene, the climatic optimum occurred during the Subboreal (5 to 2.5 ka BP) and Atlanticum (8 to 5 ka). Our current climatic phase following this climatic optimum is still within the same interglacial (the Holocene).

The preceding interglacial optimum occurred during the Late Pleistocene Eemian Stage, 131–114 ka. During the Eemian the climatic optimum took place during pollen zone E4 in the type area (city of Amersfoort, Netherlands). Here this zone is characterized by the expansion of Quercus (Oak), Corylus (Hazel), Taxus, Ulmus (Elm), Fraxinus (Ash), Carpinus (Hornbeam), and Picea (Spruce). During the Eemian Stage sea level was about 8 meters higher than today and the water temperature of the North Sea was c. 2°C higher than at present.
(This was about 114,000 years ago. A little before we started polluting the planet.)
Kottak, Conard Phillip. "Window on Humanity". New York, New York. 2005.

I'm not sure what you're asking me to find evidence to "refute." The idea that the Earth was warmer at some point in the past than it is now? Of course it has been. What does that prove or disprove? The "question" is whether industrialization is at the root of the global warming that's happening now.

But consider that 2 degrees Centigrade that marks the difference between now and the Eemian stage. Conservative estimates are that, if everything we do stays the same, a quarter of that difference will be erased by 2030, and it will keep going from there.
Imagine the coasts with seawater a significant amount of that eight meters higher.

The average (although much more in some parts of the world) temperature has risen a degree centigrade since the 1880s and has risen at a faster rate since the middle of the 20th Century. That's just not a geological pace.

Your cut and paste seems to come from a social science book. The author apparently thinks we're still in the Pleistocene. I've never seen that one before. He's apparently mixing up the Pleistocene and the "ice age." They aren't the same thing.
Technically, we're still in an ice age becuse there are large sheets of glacial ice, especially on the poles. But the Holocene, geologically speaking, has come after the Pleistocene.

The NOAA, the IPCC, the National Academy of Science and on and on see the link between human activity and increased temperatures. You might want to take a look at what they have to say about it instead of pasting sociology books off of Wikipedia.

Joyboy
I hate to say this but I have only known of one person who was ever said to know everything. Now I guess I know two.


This statement is true.
The author does not confuse the Holocene with the Pleistocene.
But the Pleistocene has and did occur during this CURRENT ice age. We are simply in an interglacial period.

Since you take such offense to my cut and paste article and seem to think it totally false how about posting a scientific paper written by someone, Other than yourself of course, that refutes the claims of the article I posted.
You don't seem to think that sea levels being 8 meters higher 100,000 years ago is the same as sea levels being 8 meters higher 50 years from now. Explain to me why that is not the same.

The Pleistocene period ended 10,000 years ago. I think he indicates that. It's not real clear. But I also don't know if the end of the Pleistocene and the end of the last Glaciation period are just coincidence.
This current Ice age has been going on for millions of years with Glaciation every 40,000 to 100,00 years or so. Some estimates put the Current Ice age at 30 Million years, some as little as 2 Million. But I think the 2 Million years is tied to the pleistocene. Which is not really correct.


Really.
Has this happened before?

The little Ice age of the 16th/17th century was tied to the climate warming and sending cold melt water into the Atlantic, too. The years preceding that the earth's temperature rose fairly quickly and it was hotter than it is today. Was that caused by man emitting great quantities of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere? In the 14th century?

There is ample evidence to support the facts of this current ice age, Glaciation and everything else that relates to it.
One more time GLOBAL WARMING IS NOT CAUSED BY MAN. it is a natural occurrence. Even if we stop polluting right now it will still happen. That is a fact. Then it will cool and the Ice will advance.
There are hundreds, thousands, of reports to support this. Google away.

I have read countless papers and reports supporting man's involvement in the current climate change. I have also read papers disputing it.
I don't know who is right, I just have my own opinion based on what I have read.

I am not a scientist but I can and do read. And I read opposing viewpoints as well.
NOTHING I have read tells me this current warming trend is any different than any other warming trend in the past. Except the fact it is happening a little faster than normal.
But on the other hand I guess the Mars Rover must be doing the same thing on Mars because it is happening there as well. And man did make the Rover and send it there.

You want to believe Global warming is mans fault that is fine with me. I simply do not.
How about since you believe it so strongly I send my increase in my utility bills to you when the Cap and Trade tax kicks in and you can pay them for me.

Just for the fun of it here's another cut and paste for you.
Granted it does not address the full issue on Global warming but it does touch the edge. Again note the last sentence.
Have at it.
Boston (MA) - Scientists at MIT have recorded a nearly simultaneous world-wide increase in methane levels. This is the first increase in ten years, and what baffles science is that this data contradicts theories stating man is the primary source of increase for this greenhouse gas. It takes about one full year for gases generated in the highly industrial northern hemisphere to cycle through and reach the southern hemisphere. However, since all worldwide levels rose simultaneously throughout the same year, it is now believed this may be part of a natural cycle in mother nature - and not the direct result of man's contributions.

For every scientific paper supporting man made climate change and its effects there is one disputing it.

Who is right? I don't know. I guess we will see.

And have you noticed they have stopped using the term "Global Warming"?
Kind of like they have stopped using "War on Terror".

If you even peek you will also find ample evidence we are right on the verge of the next glaciation period. That's when the Glaciers start to advance again.
However, the same scientists that support that theory also think man's contribution to "Global Warming" might actually prevent it.

Google away.

There is a reason why I try to know this stuff. I care. I also don't want to fight against The Global Warming theorist's if they are right.
If I write a letter to my Congressman or Senator asking them to fight against bills that support Global warming and raising my taxes I want to feel confident I am doing the right thing.
So far I think I am.
But at the same time I will raise my voice against pollution. I see no sense in us poisoning our waters and atmosphere. It is not logical.


What the heck
Yellowstone will probably blow up before that happens anyway.
But that's another debate.

Obama et al can pass all the tax increases and legislation they want but until the rest of the world follows suit it won't matter.
And the current technology is years away from getting us off fossil fuel.

As for Obama's claim that alternative energy will create millions of jobs here manufacturing the equipment;
Any one who thinks we will be able to build factories here to manufacture Solar Panels and Windmills and do it cheaper than Indonesia is living in a fantasy world.
Unless the Fed is going to subsidize the factories.
Hmmmmm.

Of course I don't know everything, Bill At least if I do, I'm aware of it.

I wouldn't be able to find anything to refute your cut and paste, because no one disagrees about that the Eemian Stage happened.
But it has nothing to do with what's happening now.

I think the author you cut and paste was confusing the Pleistocene with the ice age because he seems to say it's still going on:
During the 2.5 million year span of the Pleistocene, numerous glacials, or significant advances of continental ice sheets in North America and Europe have occurred at intervals of approximately 40,000 to 100,000 years.

It's not. But whatever.

We know for sure that I don't know everything, but I've never heard of ice melt being a factor in the Little Ice Age. I've always seen it attributed to levels of solar radiation. Here's a typical post, this one from NASA. Of course, you might think they aren't as reliable as OIMS. But whatever http://www.gsfc.nasa.gov/topstory/20011207iceage.html

How about some attribution for water causing it?


The Little Ice Age began around the 13th Century and lasted until the middle of the 19th Century.
During that time, estimates of the coldest average temp was about 1.5 degrees Celsius lower than before the Little Ice Age began.
That's over a period of 600 years. The average temperature went up almost that much again just in the 20th Century.
The coldest temps in the Little Ice Age were in the 18th and 19th Centuries. Once again, climatologists attribute it to a period of less solar radiation.

Solar radiation has been low for 13 years, and the temperature is still going up at a rate way faster than happened at the end of the Little Ice Age.
Why? Carbon gases.

Here's a few places you can read about what real scientists think:
NOAA: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/globalwarming.html
MIT: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/capitalweathergang/2009/02/new_research_from_mit_scientis.html
IPCC:http://www.ipcc.ch/
NAS:http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/306/5702/1686

These are the real scientists.
The OISM is a bad joke. The fact you cite it makes me think you're trying to cherry pick data to support a political point of view.

I don't like cap and trade, either.
But your power bill going up doesn't mean man-made greenhousegases aren't causing global warming.

Since I have no idea what the OISM is I suppose it must be my source.
Oh the petition. Yes I did post that. It's a joke? I didn't know that.
But it is not where I find my info. The ONLY thing I got from there was the petition. I search many places and read many articles and scientific papers.
You don't believe there have been Glacial and Interglacial periods at intervals of 40 to 100 thousand years? You think the Ice age ended 11,000 years ago? You think the period of Glaciation that ended 11,000 years ago was THE Ice Age?

I can sit here and Google search global warming all night and find hundreds of articles that will disagree with every article you post. That proves nothing.
If you want to believe this all hasn't happened before that's your choice.
I'm not sure how you come to the conclusion that we are not still in the ice age. We are and have been for millions of years. The last couple million just happen to be the Pleistocene period. Even the figure for that period varies from source to source. 1.8 to 2.5 years. But this current Ice age is much older than that and we are still in it. We just happen to be in an Interglacial period right now and the ice is melting.
You can agree or not, your choice.
Science has absolutely no idea how fast the earth warmed up in the last Interglacial period. It could have been one year or five hundred. They have nothing to compare this current warming trend too. It is all guess work.
I think it pointless to debate this any further. You don't think the Folks at MIT are credible?
You choose your scientists I'll choose mine But these folks are going to take everyone for a ride with their man made global warming bull.
That man is contributing to this current warming trend I don't doubt but I seriously doubt it will be the end of us.
The only thing that is different this time is we are helping it along. It's still going to happen if all mankind dies tomorrow.

Just for fun
One more
Are these folks hacks as well? not real scientists?