FPSIII Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 I am sure I will be labeled a heretic by some for posting this but I think it's best to keep an open mind. Try not to hate me too much for posting this. These views in these articles are not necessarily mine. I thought it might provoke an interesting exchange. Here are the links: Interesting articles on Global Cooling. http://tobefree.wordpress.com/2008/10/17/g...e-in-250-years/ http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/f...es-go-poof.aspx http://www.dailytech.com/Temperature+Monit...rticle10866.htm http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nathan-bu...-global-cooling FPSIII Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Allen Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 Quick perusal shows the usual cherry picking of data, particularly in article 1. As for the big picture, solar activity cycles DO contribute to annual temperature, and usually occur over a period of 12-20 years. However, they act in conjunction with other climatological changes, such as C02 and methane induced "greenhouse" effect. So while the temp in the next year or years might be lower than expected from the trend, there's nothing to prevent the temp from climbing as expected when the solar output returns toward normal. Now if you wanted to make the argument that global warming might lead to local decreases in water temperature due to the reduction in rate of flow of the gulf stream, you might have had a point! Phil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
risingsn Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 Quick perusal shows the usual cherry picking of data, particularly in article 1. As for the big picture, solar activity cycles DO contribute to annual temperature, and usually occur over a period of 12-20 years. However, they act in conjunction with other climatological changes, such as C02 and methane induced "greenhouse" effect. So while the temp in the next year or years might be lower than expected from the trend, there's nothing to prevent the temp from climbing as expected when the solar output returns toward normal. Now if you wanted to make the argument that global warming might lead to local decreases in water temperature due to the reduction in rate of flow of the gulf stream, you might have had a point! Phil Well I guess you can say only one of two things. Think of how bad this cooling would have been if we didn't have 'global warming' or ... just more info to debunk the myth. By the by, when scientist (one of which I am not) studied it, it has been found that periods GW preceeds increases in CO2, just one of those inconveinient facts. ...but I'm just sayin' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob budd Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 There is no need for a debate about global warming. Cynical Conservatives (redundant?) are using the debate to distract attention from the obvious need to reduce emissions from all possible sources. It really doesn't matter whether we are contributing to the natural global warming cycle, slowing the natural global cooling cycle, etc. We need to reduce emissions period. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Allen Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 Well I guess you can say only one of two things. Think of how bad this cooling would have been if we didn't have 'global warming' or ... just more info to debunk the myth. By the by, when scientist (one of which I am not) studied it, it has been found that periods GW preceeds increases in CO2, just one of those inconveinient facts. ...but I'm just sayin' First off, the "global cooling" reported is ~ 0.5 degrees over the six months before Feb 08 when those articles came out. Yes, that's on the scale of global warming for the last ~10 years, but also well within the short term variations seen in an otherwise substantial trend. And to be clear, the warnings about future temperature increase come not from the trends over the past years, but from models highlighting the consequences of continued increases in C02 and methane in the atmosphere. And yes, I am one of those scientists. Phil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 At this point does it matter if global warming exists or not? The focus is wrong, as people may be swayed each way facts or not. We should look at as we need to be energy independent/renewable. The Carter Solar tax incentives should be put back in place. The USA needs to provide incentives to make sure that we put solar panels (Hot water and eclectic) on practical roof. Along with Solar we need to build wind farms on and off shore. Use the tops of light polls to generate power. As for power storage to provide power when power when the sun isn't shining etc, can be stored. This can be done by many options such by pumping water up hill and released to generate power when needed. Thermal storage for AC needs. Other possible storage options include compressed-air, hydrogen, flywheel and battery energy storage, We need to start migrating to a combination of plug in diesel electric hybrids and pure electric cars (depending on the rage people need). I have a gas station in my town that sells bio diesel. Not only can we produce bio diesel in the States we need less of it than gasoline or ethanol. In the future we can look at fuel cells, today we have the technology for plug in diesel electric hybrids. We need to make a move now as we can always keep on waiting for the new technology of tomorrow. -Jason Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
subaruguru Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 Sure, just go on thinking that GW is a myth, as I corner the market: It's been clear that we can't really patrol our southern border. So the combination of GW and the evolution towards a warmer "US of Mexico" will put a huge northern migration pressure on our Canadian border. So everyone's moving north! But as the polar ice cap melts we'll run out of habitable North American land, forcing a transition from land-based to ocean-based personal transportation. Thus my latest justification for investing in LOTS of kayaks! Ern PS Do we REALLY want to open up a GW discussion? I really thought that was all settled...and after all let's not open up our boards to all that's in the kitchen sinks, eh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deb Millar Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 I am sure I will be labeled a heretic by some for posting this but I think it's best to keep an open mind. Try not to hate me too much for posting this. These views in these articles are not necessarily mine. I thought it might provoke an interesting exchange. Here are the links: Interesting articles on Global Cooling. http://tobefree.wordpress.com/2008/10/17/g...e-in-250-years/ http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/f...es-go-poof.aspx http://www.dailytech.com/Temperature+Monit...rticle10866.htm http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nathan-bu...-global-cooling FPSIII www.environmentmassachuesetts.org And we don't even have polar bears. This is a link from The Green Blog in today's Boston Globe's Health/Science section. Deb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EEL Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 PS Do we REALLY want to open up a GW discussion? This is a real discussion? I thought it was just a marketing ploy for the Nov. 9th cold water event. The water seemed cooler while rolling yesterday, and now I know why. Ed Lawson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.