Global Warming dealt another blow

obtuseobserver · Sep 7, 2010

More trouble with AGW?

say it isn't so? scientists screwed up? again?

PARIS (AFP) - ? Estimates of the rate of ice loss from Greenland and West Antarctica, one of the most worrying questions in the global warming debate, should be halved, according to Dutch and US scientists.

In the last two years, several teams have estimated Greenland is shedding roughly 230 gigatonnes of ice, or 230 billion tonnes, per year and West Antarctica around 132 gigatonnes annually.

Together, that would account for more than half of the annual three-millimetre (0.2 inch) yearly rise in sea levels, a pace that compares dramatically with 1.8mm (0.07 inches) annually in the early 1960s.
But, according to the new study, published in the September issue of the journal Nature Geoscience, the ice estimates fail to correct for a phenomenon known as glacial isostatic adjustment.

This is the term for the rebounding of Earth's crust following the last Ice Age.

Full article

David · Sep 8, 2010

obtuseobserver said:
More trouble with AGW?

say it isn't so? scientists screwed up? again?

PARIS (AFP) - ? Estimates of the rate of ice loss from Greenland and West Antarctica, one of the most worrying questions in the global warming debate, should be halved, according to Dutch and US scientists.

In the last two years, several teams have estimated Greenland is shedding roughly 230 gigatonnes of ice, or 230 billion tonnes, per year and West Antarctica around 132 gigatonnes annually.

Together, that would account for more than half of the annual three-millimetre (0.2 inch) yearly rise in sea levels, a pace that compares dramatically with 1.8mm (0.07 inches) annually in the early 1960s.
But, according to the new study, published in the September issue of the journal Nature Geoscience, the ice estimates fail to correct for a phenomenon known as glacial isostatic adjustment.

This is the term for the rebounding of Earth's crust following the last Ice Age.

Full article

Oh no, scientist made a mistake! All their findings must be wrong!

Come now... This isn't proof of anything except that they forgot to factor in something. The Ice is milting. The Sea levels are rising. Climate change is real.

obtuseobserver · Sep 8, 2010

The importance of which is the massive reordering of our economies that those scientists declared was necessary to avoid our destruction.

The predicted consequences are unreliable because the claimed facts have been unreliable. The fact is that humans are not driving changes to our climate.

FTR: Climate change is a political term coined by Frant Lutz an advisor to George Bush who adopted the term because it sounded less nasty than global warming.

David · Sep 8, 2010

obtuseobserver said:
The importance of which is the massive reordering of our economies that those scientists declared was necessary to avoid our destruction.

The predicted consequences are unreliable because the claimed facts have been unreliable. The fact is that humans are not driving changes to our climate.

FTR: Climate change is a political term coined by Frant Lutz an advisor to George Bush who adopted the term because it sounded less nasty than global warming.

Humans alone aren't causing it, no. But even discounting ice core samples, atmospheric records (which probably should be discounted due to how little time said records have been kept) and the like, just looking at smog covered cities, cow covered pastures and polluting factories/power plants should make it obvious that we're having some effect.

obtuseobserver · Sep 8, 2010

Frank Luntz - ftr

Smog... actually since the advent of catalytic converters and the switch to unleaded gas we have fewer smog days now than we did in the 70s

Regulations have helped clean up the great lakes and river systems around the country

We've done a great job a reducing pollution. However, those factors don't contribute to climate change, they contribute to pollution.

However, the costs of Cap and Trade are huge and we can calculate them. Any benefit to the climate is speculation at best with no guarantee of doing anything for that cost. A known huge cost for an unknown speculative future benefit at some point as yet to be determnined is not a wise investment.

Cow covered pastures? That anything like the millions of bufflalo that used to be out there? Good thing they were driven to the brink of extinction or we'd all be dead long ago from buffalo farts heating up the planet. Come to think of it.... we could solve this mess rigfht now if we went to the African savanahs and culled 50% of the herds! Yeah, I'm being sarcastic. Cows and Wildebeats etc don't cause global warming.

Factories? Haven't we been told our manufacturing sector has been shipped over seas?

Kyuubi · Sep 22, 2010

I don't think there's any reason to doubt that the climate is changing whether warming or cooling, but I think a lot of what's used to pin the human element to it IMO makes the A GW theories DOA. The debate has gotten way too beaurocratic over the years and instead of focusing on more immediate causes for concern they want to focus on something else entirely :\

obtuseobserver · Sep 22, 2010

The debate, according to Ellen Goodman several years ago is over. Denial of AGW is akin to holocaust denial she wrote.

The issue is not scientific. The IPCC refused to allow peer reviews until a very short time ago and each new review pannel heaps more derision on their predictions and findings of fact.

The issue is political. It is political in the sense that scientists who oppose the AGW theory get bounced from tenure track. It is political in electoral districts were questioning the theory would ensure a loss at the ballot box.

The issue is economic where people like Al Gore have positioned themselves to make billions from government mandated programs to combat AGW.

In Re Gore... google "Blood and Gore" if you're not familiar with what I'm talking about. Short verion, hes a major stock holder in a Londorn corp set up to capitalize on govt mandates

AK_ID · Sep 24, 2010

Kyuubi said:
I don't think there's any reason to doubt that the climate is changing whether warming or cooling, but I think a lot of what's used to pin the human element to it IMO makes the A GW theories DOA. The debate has gotten way too beaurocratic over the years and instead of focusing on more immediate causes for concern they want to focus on something else entirely :\

Yeah, exactly. From decade to decade (and in some cases from year to year) the climate change powers that be can't decide which way they want to argue things are headed. This planet's climate has always fluctuated, and began doing so long before there were humans around. Our influence has been, at most, minimal.

obtuseobserver · Sep 24, 2010

Yes.

And the biggest factor? Our movement within our solar system and galaxy with regard to the sun (sunspot activity, solar radiation and galaxy debris fields. The wobble sets a different cycle in motion that changes the latitudes at which the monsoon rains hit Africa and Asia. The most important feature is the greening of the Sahara.

From about 9,000 to about 5,000 B.P. the Earth enjoyed what has been called the “Holocene Optimum.” During that period the Earth was warmer than at any time since, and most areas enjoyed significantly more precipitation. Of course, there are always exceptions to such a general rule, and a few areas, like parts of the American Midwest and possibly the Amazon, appear to have been drier than they are today. Areas that today are deserts, like the Sahara, the Gobi Desert, and the Arabian Peninsula were mostly grasslands, with montane and riverine forests. In fact, some researchers believe that Earth’s axial wobble causes the Sahara to shift back and forth from arid to relatively wet every 20,000 years. Places like the Tibetan Plateau and the Andean altiplano were, at the very least, warmer than today, as were many extremely high or low latitude regions. Mysterious ancient ruins have been found in some of these places, particularly in the Andes.

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/column.php?id=175572

I have better sourced materials but too lazy to dig them up

Global Warming dealt another blow

Similar threads