What are your thoughts on Global Warming

This is "just" part of the soutchern coast of Greenland
ADVERTISEMENT
It's apparent to me that it is a weather trend that is being stirred into a politicized frenzy. Though, the good that may come out of that is eco-friendly manufacturing and
cleaner air and clearer thinking of how to be more "Green".
Permalink
tags: Global, warming + add tags
savecancel
posted on Sun, May 25, 2008 07:54 AM
CommentsRSS Feed
Want to leave a comment? Log In to your account
It's a myth! bycowgirlmedic3 months ago (7 votes) (report abuse) (reply)
Global Warming isn't what people think it is. It is the natural cycle of the Earth. Humans only contribute to it a tiny amount with greenhouse gasses. The government uses Global Warming as an excuse to introduce laws which limit our freedoms. Some scientists who promote the "man made cause of the climate change" get government funding...hmm...

It's just a political ploy

This doesn't mean that I don't support recycling or controlling your own wastes...I just don't believe that we are the cause of the planet changing.
RE: It's a myth! byBozemaniteNo314233 months ago (4 votes) (report abuse)
You're right, one heck of a marketing scheme! That is good for eveyone!!
It's not science — it's a political agenda! bygixa3 months ago (3 votes) (report abuse) (reply)
We can't even get an accurate 5-day weather forecast, and I'm supposed to believe scientists can predict global warming? Pulleeze!

Maybe I'm skeptical because I remember when scientists predicted global cooling for the 1980s. We were treated to dire predictions of the glaciers advancing all the way south through Canada and into the northern United States. There were going to be major catastrophes with very little of the population surviving and those who did would live desperate lives trying to scrape sustenance from the frozen tundra. We all know how that turned out. (Heh.) Check out Global Cooling: 1954-1976 here if you don't believe me. http://www.businessandmedia.org/specialreports/2006/fireandice/fireandice.asp

What really gets me are the supporters of global warming who can't even grasp the basic premise of climate change. When local temperatures were so warm last week, a friend of mine said it was evidence of "global warming". I explained to her that — even if it exists — no one can feel global warming; we're talking about 0.74°C (+/- 0.18°) in the last 100 years. I told my friend she was talking about natural temperature variation. I got a blank look. So I took her to the AccuWeather website and showed her the recent highs compared to record highs for Bozeman:

16 May 2008 = 79°F, record high 88°F in 1988
17 May 2008 = 83°F, record high 87°F in 2007
18 May 2008 = 85°F, record high 86°F in 2006
19 May 2008 = 81°F, record high 92°F in 1954
20 May 2008 = 85°F, record high 87°F in 1954
More here: http://www.accuweather.com/forecast-climo.asp?partner=netweather&traveler=0&zipChg=1&zipChg=1&zipcode=59715&metric=0

Still got the blank look.

Requisite disclaimer: we should obviously keep an open mind about climate change and its possible causes and effects, but we really need to stop jumping to quick conclusions and enacting ill-considered legislation about light bulbs and thermostats. I recycle and conserve as much as possible, but I'm not losing any sleep over my carbon footprint.
Whatever it is "I'm agin it" bycwrite3 months ago (2 votes) (report abuse) (reply)
The average lifespan is less than a hundred years.
From that perspective it isn't possible to make any valid assumptions.
Humans have short memories & the collective memory is worse.
They seem to repeat their mistakes generation after generation.
How on earth are they going to fix global warming?
RE: Whatever it is "I'm agin it" by2ndMonkey3 months ago (3 votes) (report abuse)
Thanx Mr Spock ~ your words may help the next generations immensely!
Population byuptown3 months ago (2 votes) (report abuse) (reply)
Global warming, even if it's not as severe as some people think is one of the results of having a planet that has never held quite the population it does now. We are suffering a shortage of resources, including food, and due to our numbers we are using resources at levels we never have before. Personally I do beleive there is global warming but it's the result of a bigger situation. I'm calling it a situation and not an issue or problem, because issues and problems means there are solutions, and I think it is what it is.
The problem I ....... bydwainegf3 months ago (2 votes) (report abuse) (reply)
The problem I have with the UN study is that they commishioned 56 highly touted scientist and selected data from 22 of them and called it good science. I'm not sure if there is a correlation between human carbon creation and environmental changes or not. I do believe we can do a better job of limiting our use of resourses. I also believe we can do better at reusing and recycling.
Nature's own Global Warming bycafrench3 months ago (2 votes) (report abuse) (reply)
Recently there have been articles and reviews on the melting Arctic ice and the warming temperatures. While we may blame humans for "global warming," Nature itself has provide a much greater source of greenhouse gases in the form of "Burning Ice" (Methane Hydrates) that in the geological past have outgassed in massive amounts periodically into the atmosphere. I will review the megatons of burning ice later on, but first there is a technical scientific issue to resolve.

The issue of "global warming" brings up the need for good mathematics in analyzing the various data sources to determine the true causes-and-effects ("inputs" and "outputs") and to filter out those causes that either do not affect the output, or in minor ways, or in combined effects that do not show up until certain conditions are correct. As I have spent time in R&D and also getting my series of degrees, I have found that very few scientists and researchers know how to use statistics properly to be able to filter and view data for the actual, true cause-and-effects. Too many times statistical regression methods are used that assume a direct relationship between the causes and effect, which may not be real. Although there are several books on the market, one of the best books I know of that can help researchers, analysts, and scientists is a book entitled, "Statistics for Experimenters," by Box, Hunter, and Hunter.

When it comes to global warming, there are more causes than most scientists have considered. For example, the increase in the number and intensity of solar eruptions has a much higher statistical correlation than the other causes/inputs. There are not many web pages that show these in good ways, but here are two articles for present the correlations rather easily.

http://www.qualitydigest.com/mar98/html/spctool.html
http://www.qualitydigest.com/april98/html/spctool.html

Although these graphs are from the late 1990s, the use of this type of statistical tool, SPC charting, has hardly ever been used by scientific researchers and investigators. Most of them have used other mathematical methods that assume a direct correlation between greenhouse gases and Global warming, as directed and determined by the process modeler. This traditional "assumption" may not be correct, and in some cases may potentially mislead scientists and modelers. These other tools can allow a scientist to purposely minimize the effects from natural causes and to maximize the effects of human sources.

Some researchers say that they know all the effects that the increased solar flux has on the atmosphere and have included this in their models, and stated that there are no real effects from the solar flux. But then there are other scientists with different theories on the effects of increased flux that present different scenarios for atmospheric reactions, such as the geomagnetic fields and changes, volcanics and their outgassings, etc. You do not hear much in the news about these other scientists and their results.

People should be very cautious about assuming that the global warming "effect" is due solely to "greenhouse" gases. Also, it should be noted that recent satellite data has shown that upper atmosphere is actually cooling:

http://www.lanl.gov/orgs/pa/News/121699text.html
http://ees5-www.lanl.gov/IGPP/Debate2.html
(some of these links may not be working due to computer changes since 9-11)

Some researchers say that their theory and modeling shows that this cooling should occur, while others show differing effects. We see that there is still not complete agreements on the causes and especially the effects of global warming. Then there are some researchers who have purposely manipulated their models, formulas, and analyses to purposely disregard all other inputs and only tie the temperatures to greenhouse gases.

There is the other issue of how some scientists and researchers can purposely change the structure of the formulas used in their models, the mathematical terms used in the formulas, the parameters and scaling factors in the formulas, and the values of any exponentials so as to obtain predetermined results that the scientists wanted to get anyway. This allows the scientist to minimize effects from natural causes and to maximize the effects of human sources. This is "tampering" with the formulas so as to get the predetermined results that someone might want to get, no matter what the real processes are.

In my experiences in the scientific / R&D cultures, I have seen this happen several times, even with Peer Reviews. Peer Reviews are "supposed" to catch incorrect things, inconsistencies, and errors. But this does not always occur. In some cases, the scientific peers involved in those Peer Reviews also wanted "certain" results to come out of the modeling and designs that they were reviewing. In other cases, the peers were not paying attention to critical items and issues.

Also the issue of temperature collection has not been properly resolved. Temperatures are taken in cities that have the heat island effect. I have seen several different approached to handling and correcting these heat effects, but these approaches vary and also give various results. Then there is the issue of thermometer calibration. I have observed where some thermometers for city temperatures were not calibrated properly at the required intervals, and some times not calibrated at all. How can we trust the temperature data if there are these variations in the instruments?

When it comes to Nature's greenhouse generators through the Burning Ice (Methane Hydrates), we soon realize that our gases are very small when compared to the megatons of methane hydrates that are held within our oceans in a manner similar to a bathtub ring. Also the Earth has had major accumulations and releases in its geological past over the eons, some of which scientists now believe may have lead to some great temperature increases in the Earth's past, long before humans were ever around.

Let me give you some web sites that describe the characteristics and issues with the Earth's Burning Ice and the natural abundance of methane greenhouse gases:

General information on chemistry and biology of Methane Hydrates:
--> http://www.at-sea.org/missions/extremes/preview.html

--> http://www-ocean.tamu.edu/Quarterdeck/QD5.3/sassen.html

--> http://ench1.ench.ucalgary.ca/~hydrates/

--> http://fossil.energy.gov/programs/oilgas/hydrates/

--> http://www.mbari.org/ghgases/

--> http://www.mbari.org/ghgases/geochem/gas_hydrates.htm

--> http://www.mbari.org/volcanism/Margin/Marg-Hydrates.htm

--> http://www.netl.doe.gov/scngo/NaturalGas/hydrates/index.html

U. S. Geological Survey (USGS) fact sheets:
--> http://walrus.wr.usgs.gov/hydrates/

--> http://marine.usgs.gov/fact-sheets/gas-hydrates/title.html

--> http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs021-01/

--> http://woodshole.er.usgs.gov/project-pages/hydrates/

Germany's research:
--> http://www.mpi-bremen.de/deutsch/biogeo/mumm2.html

--> http://www.gashydrate.de/

In the geological records and how dramatically and even violently the climate has changed, long before modern man came around. There is very strong geological and scientific evidence that the massive Extinction in the Permian Era many millions of years ago in the Earth's geological past was caused both by massive volcanism and by Methane Hydrates.
http://www.terradaily.com/news/deepimpact-05r.html

Study breaks ice on ancient Arctic thaw:
http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Study_Breaks_Ice_On_Ancient_Arctic_Thaw_999.html
(previous periods of global warming)

And then there is the aspect of climate change from meteors:
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/climate-05zzzzo.html

Outgassing of Carbon Dioxide (CO2) from volcanoes:
http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs172-96/

Inaccuracies in measurements of climates:
http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Antarctic_Snow_Inaccurate_Temperature_Archive.html

Ancient Climate Studies Suggest Earth On Fast Track To Global Warming
http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Ancient_Climate_Studies_Suggest_Earth_On_Fast_Track_To_Global_Warming.html

Green plants also cause Global Warming:
http://www.the-scientist.com/news/display/22944/
http://www.germany-info.org/relaunch/info/publications/week/2006/060113/e-list.html#Wi1
http://www.terradaily.com/news/The_Forgotten_Methane_Source.html
http://www.terradaily.com/news/Could_Forests_Worsen_Global_Warming.html
http://www.terradaily.com/news/Extinctions_Linked_To_Climate_Change.html

Farming Provides Wildlife Habitat And Reduces Global Warming
http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Farming_Provides_Wildlife_Habitat_And_Reduces_Global_Warming.html

Prehistoric warming helped preserve fossils:
http://www.terradaily.com/news/climate-05zzzzzi.html

Ancient tropical warming and nature's greenhouse gases
http://www.terradaily.com/news/climate-05zzzzzj.html

Volcanic impacts on ocean levels:
http://www.terradaily.com/news/oceans-05y.html

Climate change and massive flooding:
http://www.terradaily.com/news/The_Role_Of_Massive_Floods_In_Climate_Change.html

Late Pleistocene Americans Faced Chaotic Climate Change Environments:
http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Late_Pleistocene_Americans_Faced_Chaotic_Climate_Change_Environments.html

Global Warming evidence from 55 million years ago:
http://www.terradaily.com/news/climate-05zzzzzzb.html

Tropical ice cores shows two abrupt Global Climate shifts:
http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Tropical_Ice_Cores_Shows_Two_Abrupt_Global_Climate_Shifts_999.html

How continental splits resulted in global cooling:
http://www.terradaily.com/news/antarctic-05q.html

Earth's burping from wobbling also affects climate:
http://www.terradaily.com/news/climate-05zzzzt.html

Geomagnetism as one factor in rain / weather:
http://www.terradaily.com/reports/Magnets_Help_Explain_Rain_Patterns.html

None of the environmentalists or businesses involved in reducing carbon emissions can go and blame massive climate changes in the past on power plants and vehicles!

It is not wise to make international policies on theories that are not agreed upon by the scientists who have been studying these causes and effects. Other scientists have published their works dealing with other causes, but have not been given the publicity such as the US National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) has received.

But if the Solar Sun is the major, primary cause and we are just a minor contributor, then our Governments are imposing on us a major compliance issue that will NOT solve the problem. Control of carbon emissions does NOT equal Control of the Solar Sun and its flux intensities on us. Several environmental groups have told us and openly admitted at other times that they want to use the idea of human sources in order to shut down industrial activities -- their words, not ours.

Retired Univ. of California technical staff member at Los Alamos, New Mexico, USA.
RE: Nature's own Global Warming byMontana0073 months ago (1 votes) (report abuse)
Thank you. I sincerely hope that people read your post and consider the vast amount of research that contradicts the popular politically charged view of global warming. In any event it is important that we continue to strive for ways to live conscientiously and be good stewards of the planet while enjoying and understanding that we are a part of something much larger than ourselves.
Global Warming byberrymountain2 months ago (0 votes) (report abuse) (reply)
I support the non-proven, but highly suspicious possibility of global warming and the long term effects it could and I believe will pose to future generations. Over the past 200 years, we have polluted the air, water, and soil.

How can we begin to deny there are, and will be repercussions for this.

Building Green: If say lumber or other buildingmaterials are removed from an old building, (recycled) and used for a new "Green Building," the process that the lumber/material go through (which many times involves chemical stripping, transportation by ships, trucks, etc.)may create MORE waste and hazardous waste, than if the material needed was simply produced from raw/virgin material.
What's causing it...?? byalamator2 months ago (0 votes) (report abuse) (reply)
Last summer the temperature in Bozeman was at or OVER 100 degrees for 5 days in a row and at one point, over 90 degrees for nearly 30 days in a row. That's insane! Growing up in the Gallatin Valley in the '60's & '70's, you saw 100 degrees once, maybe twice in a 3 - 5 year period.
To close your eyes and think that the earth is NOT warming is disturbing. Is it all caused by man? I doubt it. But we are contributing at an alarming rate.
What happens when you run your car in a closed garage? You die! Multiply that a few hundred million times and there is a possibility of a problem. Ya think?
Don't get me wrong. I'm not jumping on the Al Gore wagon of doom & gloom, but we have to do something soon. If we are on the brink of self devastation, at least we can say we "tried" to stop it or slow it down.