Snooooow, Snoooow

[nathanm]

quote:Originally posted by sauerkraut

quote:Originally posted by nathanm

quote:Originally posted by sauerkraut

"Knee-Jerk" is common in the global warming fan's world. They don't want to study it they don't want to debate it, all they keep saying is "We must act now before it's too late" & "act now, think latter".. Al Gore refuses to debate this subject with anyone, not even with reporters and he flys around in his private Gulf Stream Jet that burns 450 gallons of fuel a hour, then he wants everyone else to take a bus, walk, ride a bike or drive a tiny car to work. IMO I believe the globe is cooling, we have not had any real "hot" summers in Ohio for about 20 years, we use to get a few 100 degree days each summer lately we rarely get any 90 degree summer days and they have been closing the city public swimming pools more early than before, it gets too cold for swimming and no one uses the pools. The winters seem to be getting longer and colder.[xx(]

Funny, in Northwest Arkansas the summers seemed hotter and longer to me. Again, you confuse weather with climate.

If you want to talk about the weather, how about at the ends of the earth where the temperatures are most extreme?

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/256/story/54229.html

Or maybe that it was 16 degrees above normal yesterday in Columbus?

Oh, and you're full of **** when you say you used to get a few 100 degree days each summer, unless you're specifically talking about the summer of 1936, when there were 8 days with record high temperatures that were over 100 degrees. (which also, incidentally, had several of the coldest days on record)

Sometimes columbus gets one or two. There was one in July '99..that's one in the last twelve years (I looked back as far as 1996). Yet you claim that you used to 'usually' get 'a few each summer'.

Not that any of that has any bearing whatsoever on the global climate.

Climate is weather over a long peroid of time, and we had cool summers and bitter long cold winters in the midwest. I lived in Texas (Dallas Fort Worth) during the 1980's and I loved the weather. My first year in Texas 1980 we had a big heatwave that summer (it's listed in google), that was before the global warming craz so the heat wave was not blamed on anything. We had something like 45 days of above 100 degree temps and the low never diped below 90 degrees at night. I loved it, I also vacationed alot in Las Vegas when it was 115 degrees. When I transfered to Ohio in 1989 I missed the warm mild weather of Texas, it's hard to get use-to colder climates once you live in a mild climate. As for Ohio all I said is we don't get the warm weather like we use to in Ohio. Summers are cooler and winters colder and longer. I would favor a debate between the global warming people and people who don't buy into that hoax. That is what we need, but the global warming side does not want to debate the issue, they refuse to look at real data that shows there is no global warming. Like I said before if we had the 1930's dust bowl in 2008 it would be blamed on global warming today no question about that.[xx(]

Your statement about people blaming certain weather events on global warming is a complete straw man. No climatologist does that. (Or very few, if there are exceptions)

Only laypersons and people who disbelieve in climate change do that. The former because they hear "the globe is warming, and that could cause stronger hurricanes" and think "oh, these major hurricanes are caused by global warming," when no specific weather event is the result of global warming.

Whether you like it or not, the global average temperature has been increasing since we started keeping records. Sometimes it does in fact go down for a few years, but the trend is still upwards. An increase in the rate of change was seen when we started burning more and more fuel and pumping more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

Think of it like the stock market. As we pump more and more funny money into it, it keeps going up and up. Sometimes it drops, but the overall trend is still upwards.

[sauerkraut]

The temp. trend since 1998 is down. It's getting colder. They had snow in Las Vegas, so much snow that some car port roofs collapsed, they never got snow like that before. They had snow in New Orleans the most early snowfall since 1850 there, and it's not even winter yet. Western China also had record snows near Tibet. The planet is NOT warming. The polar ice is growing thicker not thinner. The climate goes in cycles warm peroids and cold peroids, there is no steady upward trend in temp it's going down. Brrrr! I know some global warming fans have been  saying that cold weather is caused by global warming because they need to find a excuse to explain away all these cold years. Talk about me making a example of this cold weather, when there is a batch of a few warm days in winter such as the normal "January Thaw" the global warming people jump all over that and say "see, see we told you it's January and it's warm, it's global warming see we told ya" But when it's super cold they keep quiet. Global warming is the biggest hoax being played on the people, Al Gore and his kind want everyone to drink that Kool-Aid. They won't even debate the issue. They know the facts will shut them down.

[nathanm]

quote:Originally posted by sauerkraut

They know the facts will shut them down.

Are you sure you aren't confusing yourself for these "global warming fans" you speak of?

What you fail to grasp is that what someone like me or like these "global warming fans" say isn't important. The data is what's important. While there hasn't been significant warming in the last few years, there have been other periods in the past where there has been a temporary halt (and even cooling) before again resuming the upward trend.

And ice thickening? Where are you getting that? The references I see indicate significant thinning in the last couple of years.

A BBC story from yesterday: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7786910.stm

[we vs us]

I've said it before and I'll say it again, I'll never understand why the anti-climate change crew can't see the HUUUUUGE opportunities that this paradigm shift will open up.  

Sauerkraut, it's immaterial whether the science is right or not.  We don't have to argue that at all.  What's more important is whether the world on balance believes the science is correct.    

And if the world on balance believes the science is correct, then that's the reality that we're going to be living with.  So:  we can either fight it and increasingly be percieved as out of touch or ignorant or simply obstinate, or we can agree to go forward using that template.  

Americans are not only excellent innovators, but we're exceptional pioneers.  New doesn't (shouldn't) scare us.  Given that an alternative energy infrastructure would entail changes large and small in our daily lives, think about all the new business, new jobs, and new money that those changes would generate.  Not just power generation, but power transmission, changes to the vehicles we drive and how we get the power to move them; changes in how our homes consume power and how our businesses.  It's limitless stuff, because power is everywhere.  

I wish you, Sauerkraut, would spend more time thinking of ways a change like that would be beneficial, rather than how it's a threat to our way of life.  In a way (in the pioneer way), facing down a paradigm shift like climate change is quintessentially American.

[Red Arrow]

quote:Originally posted by we vs us
[

Sauerkraut, it's immaterial whether the science is right or not.  We don't have to argue that at all.  What's more important is whether the world on balance believes the science is correct.    

I cannot agree and won't apologize for disagreeing by starting my reply with "sorry".  Ignoring correct science to follow incorrect science is a waste of resources.  

Alternate energy, power generation, vehicle changes etc are worthwhile goals on their own.

If they must be tied to a lie, maybe they shold not be pursued.

Let's say your car doesn't go and is towed to a repair shop.  You insist the transmission is shot and insist on overhauling or replacing the transmission. You insist, even thhough the shop manager sees and points out to you a broken driveshaft. Possibly the shop would work on the transmission as a customer demanded service and bill you according.  The car still wouldn't go. You would get angry. If you then asked them to fix the car you would also get a bill for a broken drive shaft that fixed it. This is a simple example.  You would have to be stupid to ignore the broken driveshaft.  It is also wrong to ignore data on the environment just because it does not support a popular theory.

Do things from a base of knowledge, not just a popular cause.

[sauerkraut]

Global Warming people always ignore the effects of the sun in the computer models. Garbage in garbage out- That's like having a inspection of your homes heating system where they check the door seals and window seals, and check the atic insulation but they don't check the furnace the main driving force of a homes heating system. The sun is the driving force of earths climate and it's ignored all the time. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,468084,00.html

[sauerkraut]

There is lots of info to read about the global warming hoax on google by googling "global warming hoax" or "debunking global warming" or words to that effect, tons of stuff comes up. The arctic and polar areas are growing colder. The ice is growing, nothing is melting at -60 below zero. The polar ice melts in the summer and it re-freezes thicker in the winter. Brrrr.

[Hoss]

quote:Originally posted by sauerkraut

There is lots of info to read about the global warming hoax on google by googling "global warming hoax" or "debunking global warming" or words to that effect, tons of stuff comes up. The arctic and polar areas are growing colder. The ice is growing, nothing is melting at -60 below zero. The polar ice melts in the summer and it re-freezes thicker in the winter. Brrrr.

There's a difference between temperature and climate.

Sheesh, you're like a little kid sticking his fingers in his ears saying over and over 'lalalalalalalala'....

Any goofball can throw up a website CLAIMING to debunk global warming.  Google searches on this topic mean nothing without science to back them up.

[nathanm]

quote:Originally posted by sauerkraut

There is lots of info to read about the global warming hoax on google by googling "global warming hoax" or "debunking global warming" or words to that effect, tons of stuff comes up. The arctic and polar areas are growing colder. The ice is growing, nothing is melting at -60 below zero. The polar ice melts in the summer and it re-freezes thicker in the winter. Brrrr.

Your post is entirely factually incorrect aside from the fact that there are indeed web sites that claim that there is no such thing as global warming.

Of course, you can't even be bothered to click on the links I've provided in this thread that show ever newer evidence that the poles are warming.

As the summer extent of sea ice in the Arctic decreases, there is more sea surface available to absorb solar energy. The sea absorbs something like 70% of the sun's energy that strikes it. The ice reflects something around 90% of it.

And if you've ever had a glass of ice water, you can understand the concept that as long as there is ice remaining in the glass, the temperature of the water stays around 32 degrees. Once it melts, there's nothing around to continue absorbing the excess heat, so it rapidly warms.

[cannon_fodder]

Good analogy on the ice in a glass thing Nathan. Not quite the same since oceans are not a coherent temperature throughout, but good enough.  

It is worth noting, however, that over the last 2 or 3 years temperatures have gone down and ice levels have increased.  After reaching the lowest point in 30 years ice levels are now back near their normal levels.

Actually, there is 500,000 sq km MORE ice this year than there was last year (int he arctic, where winter measurements are clearly complete).  This being the 3rd consecutive  year of MORE ice it create a potential problem for Global Warming, so they merely adjusted the scale and said those 500,000 km didn't really count.  Really, that's what they did.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24834853-20261,00.html

Damn Global Warming, all adding more ice to the Arctic.  If shrinking ice packs are prima facia evidence of Global Warming, wouldn't growing ice packs pretty much destroy the notion?

I grant you this is NOT evidence that Global Warming is not factual.  But neither are most of things pointed to as "proof" of global warming.  People are now invested financially, professionally, and emotionally in the notion of Global Warming.  Such attachments make for bad science.

[sauerkraut]

Here's a intresting link about the global warming hoax... They like to doctor the numbers and facts to make it look like the polar areas are melting. This is all to push a political agenda of making carbon a item to trade with and a way to tax people for using carbon. It's pretty scary they ignore facts and blindly follow the hoax.. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/3883550/Facts-melted-by-global-warming.html [xx(]

[sauerkraut]

quote:Originally posted by nathanm

quote:Originally posted by sauerkraut

There is lots of info to read about the global warming hoax on google by googling "global warming hoax" or "debunking global warming" or words to that effect, tons of stuff comes up. The arctic and polar areas are growing colder. The ice is growing, nothing is melting at -60 below zero. The polar ice melts in the summer and it re-freezes thicker in the winter. Brrrr.

Your post is entirely factually incorrect aside from the fact that there are indeed web sites that claim that there is no such thing as global warming.

Of course, you can't even be bothered to click on the links I've provided in this thread that show ever newer evidence that the poles are warming.

As the summer extent of sea ice in the Arctic decreases, there is more sea surface available to absorb solar energy. The sea absorbs something like 70% of the sun's energy that strikes it. The ice reflects something around 90% of it.

And if you've ever had a glass of ice water, you can understand the concept that as long as there is ice remaining in the glass, the temperature of the water stays around 32 degrees. Once it melts, there's nothing around to continue absorbing the excess heat, so it rapidly warms.

I read the link- it was about those darn computer models. Like I said they don't go with the real facts. Garbage in and garbage out. The computer models if run backwards they give different weather than what we just experenced. (In other words they get the past weather reports wrong) The computer models leave out the two most important things about a climate The SUN and Water Vapor (the real big greenhouse gas not carbon)..  If the computer models can't get the past weather correct, everything they say about the future weather is doubtful. The South Pole had some huge ice  build-up, ice sheets are growing all over over. Snowfall is increasing. Eastern Russia has been having record cold of -60 below zero.. Alabama had 10 degrees. Brrr!

[nathanm]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

Good analogy on the ice in a glass thing Nathan. Not quite the same since oceans are not a coherent temperature throughout, but good enough.  

It is worth noting, however, that over the last 2 or 3 years temperatures have gone down and ice levels have increased.  After reaching the lowest point in 30 years ice levels are now back near their normal levels.

Actually, there is 500,000 sq km MORE ice this year than there was last year (int he arctic, where winter measurements are clearly complete).  This being the 3rd consecutive  year of MORE ice it create a potential problem for Global Warming, so they merely adjusted the scale and said those 500,000 km didn't really count.  Really, that's what they did.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24834853-20261,00.html

Damn Global Warming, all adding more ice to the Arctic.  If shrinking ice packs are prima facia evidence of Global Warming, wouldn't growing ice packs pretty much destroy the notion?

I grant you this is NOT evidence that Global Warming is not factual.  But neither are most of things pointed to as "proof" of global warming.  People are now invested financially, professionally, and emotionally in the notion of Global Warming.  Such attachments make for bad science.

The problem with the winter measurements is that there's also been less sea ice in the summer, along with warmer summer temperatures, although I guess we'll have to see what summer '09 brings.

http://blogs.nature.com/climatefeedback/2008/10/has_arctic_summer_sea_ice_tipp.html

http://www.nature.com/climate/2008/0811/full/climate.2008.108.html
h
Also, the figure you reference fails to account for the thickness of the ice sheet. Volume is as important as extent.

What date was this ice 'vanished,' btw? And which website are we talking about, NSIDC? The referenced article is nonspecific to the point of being useless and I can't find any other references on Google News.