The truth about climate change

[Sonia]

Are we being misled by ignorant or lazy climate change scientists working for a global warming industry. Science thrives on disagreement; new observations and hypothesis are always questioned and, if they stand up, are strengthened thereby. Ideas change as new data becomes available. Cimate change was once regarded as a slow process unlikely to be observable over a human lifetime. Then, in the 1990s, ice core studies revealed that dramatic changes, occuring in as a little as a decade, had taken palce many times in the past. Variations in the Earth's orbital characteristics may have forced the major ice ages of the last 2 million years, but the phenomenon of rapid climate change seems to be linked to interactions between our planets oceans and atmosphere. It sounds odd but global warming could mean colder weather for some of us. The climate of present day Europe relies on North Atlantic circulation. Whereby northwards flowing warm surface waters of the gulf stream encounter cold air moving eastwards. The air is warmed before it reaches Europe, while the sea cools, become denser and sinks, forming a deep ocean current. This circulationsystem is vulnerable to any increase in freshwater input, which has often switched it off by reduing the density of the surface waters. It could happen again: more melting icebergs and precipitation are likely consequences of global warming. For Britain this would mean severe winters, just compare our climate with Canada at the same latitude. We know little however about how climate and weather might behave in the few years between on and off.

[Argonavis (William)]

There is many issues around "global warming" - temperature proxies and reconstructions, CO2 levels, methane levels, impact of water vapour, urban heat islands, reduced satellite data, glacier studies, research funding sources and inherent biases, sea level changes, and the effect on the gulf stream and the imapct of this on the climate in northern europe.

There is a lot of political froth and speculation in this space. Wading through all the data and commentary to get some sense of the science is a nightmare. I am concerned the reputation science will have when global warmings wild predictions fail to materialise. Michael Crichton in "Climate of Fear" compared global warming science to the now discredited "science" of eugenitics.

A good summary site is:

http://www.junkscience.com/MSU_Temps...ng_Proxies.htm

No one really knows what causes climate change over geologic history. No-one knows the mechanisms. The current view seems to blame CO2 emission from cars and planes and industry, however the temperatures in the 1970's were going down as CO2 was going up.

If the gulf stream "shuts off" will europe be uninhabitable? Maybe, maybe not.

Maybe europe is in terminal decline as they are not breeding enough to replace their population. Women want careers, ski holidays and condos not kids.

I have found that the future is always not only totally different from what you can imagine, but totally different from what could possibly be envisaged.

[GrampianStars (Rob)]

No point breeding if there's no food for feeding
just look at the 3rd world
religious breeders & starving children

To believe that humans have not altered the climate with their massive industrial waste polutants over the last 200+ years
is really going about ignorantly in your own small world with blnkers on

[ving (David)]

Originally Posted by GrampianStars

To believe that humans have not altered the climate with their massive industrial waste polutants over the last 200+ years
is really going about ignorantly in your own small world with blnkers on

true robert, but is it complete argoance to believe that we the all mighty human race have the power to destroy the planet? If we put our egos aside for just a moment we might very well find that our input into global warming, while there is actually quite minimal and that temperatures and weather paterns were heading in that direction anyhow and will continue to do so regardless of what we do. It is entirely posible (and indeed probable) that if we didnt exist that the world would be in a similar part of its never ending cycle of droughts, iceages, etc... i guess theres no way to tell hey?

bring on the ice age i say!

[xelasnave]

When there is money involved (and remem ber this is now a huge industry... count the heads who get their pay slip from employers pushing the barrow of fear and doom if they are not listened to)
Who has the financial interests to promote these ideas.
The new clean energy mob have everything to gain from stimulating the fear.
It is doubtful that if humans to blame that humans can provide the answer.
The prospect of a global cold is historically consistent and probably more likey the future of the world than the one currently put forward by fuel salesmen.
alex

[avandonk]

It is very simple folks, we are influencing climate change to the point of a 'tipping' event occurring. Our weather is an example of chaotic behaviour. Anyone who decries the evidence is deluded. I won't go into the litany of evidence, but if you ask me nicely I will tell you.

Bert

[mickoking]

Many on this forum know my view on this subject, Man is largely (but not totally) responsable for climate change. I have nothing to gain from this assertion. having balanced the competing views of the subject I came to the conclusion that all the crap our society pumps into our fragile atmosphere in particular CO2, must have an effect.

Thats my 2 Bobs worth Mick

[acropolite (Phil)]

Global warming is only part of the problem. Whether climate change is real or not, we're destroying pretty well everything around us, our native flora and fauna, and most importantly the air we breathe..

[xelasnave]

well grab as big a piece as you can afford and look after it.. my trees and animals will have a home for as long as I live at least and I recon 200 acres of trees produces more "air" than I use... mmm maybe I should bottle some its hard to come by in some places. In time that getting a small slice of the planet you can care for will be the best financial advice you will ever get also... land is running out faster than any of you realise.
Dont get me wrong on the warming thing it is presumed it is the event that will bring the cold change of ice age proportion ..or so I have read of convincing authors views.
It is important to keep people focused on this problem if nothing else to be more conservative in use of limited resources.. time to think about actions and concequences
alex

[casstony]

You can give yourself a headache trying to sort this issue out, but ultimately it distils down to the fact that the majority of scientists say global warming is real and that we are contributing to the warming. You just need to decide whether or not it's logical to believe the majority of scientists. They could be wrong, but what if they're not?

Tony

[Argonavis (William)]

Originally Posted by casstony

You can give yourself a headache trying to sort this issue out, but ultimately it distils down to the fact that the majority of scientists say global warming is real and that we are contributing to the warming. You just need to decide whether or not it's logical to believe the majority of scientists.
Tony

I am not sure where this "majority of scientists" stuff actually comes from. Has someone conducted a poll? Was it Yes/No? Multiple choice?

I remember reading a post on another forum from a geologist or geophysicist who was asked to sign a petition on this. He had the integrity to refuse, as he was honest enought to admit that really doesn't know. He was not an expert in the field and had not read all the papers. Neither am I, so I remain agnostic.

So who is driving this? Science is not a popularity contest.

It has been suggested that the global warming skeptics are retired academics who do not have a vested interest in creating a crisis to get more funding fpr their research. I understand that the skepticism is not so much as to the extent of a warming trend, more the wild speculation on where the climate is going. I remember 20 years ago the sea levels would soon rise and flood our cities. I am still waiting.

[casstony]

There are vested interests on both sides. Coal and oil industries have loads of cash to support any scientist that wants to push their barrow.

Tony

[astroron (Ron)]

I think they mean the majority of climatolagy Scientists agree that there is a problem, but for every piece of true information there are probably just as many pieces of untrue information.
I am a believer in climate change, my analagy of you cannot put a gallon in a pint pot refers to the amount of polutants going into the atmospher and which is not being disolved so it will only be able to take so much before there is a change in the way the earths climate is effected.
The poisening of our waters, and the distruction of forests and ecosystems can only go on for so long before the damage is irreversable.
To put our heads in the sand and say it is not happening is rediculas as there is a great deal of evidence to the contrary.
We can all say we are not scientist but we can all think and we can all see and read, watch, and comprehend what's going on and it is upto us what legacy we leave for future generations and I for one am not very confident that we will leave them a better world than we have now.

[netwolf]

Human beings do affect the natural state of things, the extinction or extermination of so many of natures treasures are a testiment to it. Artificaly introducing more Co2 into the envirornment no doubt has an effect or will have an effect but who really knows what that is. Over farming, not repopulating cut trees all has an effect but what is it. How do we measure this.

In todays world can any study truely be credited as being unbiased. Regardless of weather we belive or not someone will make a profit. Conservation of profit, profit is nither created or destroyed its just transfered. But that is our nature to survive regardless of the consequences to others.

All progress has its vices and virtues. Imagine that we stopped cutting treas and replanted all the treas. More trees might also mean more bird in trees more noise polution from birds. What determines the balance, nature, God, human intelegence..