Global Warming is to blame???

Pages

418 posts / 0 new
Last post
Murdock's picture
Murdock
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 7/12/03
Global Warming is to blame???

James Lein is a community columist for the Minot Daily,Says it not the corp,game and fish or the canadians to blame for all the flooding in ND>Its all of us and the lifestyles we are living-causing Global warming and floods.OK---Heres the link to the his Opinion......http://www.minotdailynews.com/page/content.detail/id/555810/Who-s-to-bla...

Murdock's picture
Murdock
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 7/12/03
Skager's picture
Skager
Offline
Joined: 4/5/11

I agree for the most part!!!!!

Im on a mission, Im goin fishin!!

hunter77's picture
hunter77
Offline
Joined: 1/15/03

One flaw with his theory.  The mountains have been cooler than average, heck we have  been cooler on the plains as well.  So saying that the snowpack is melting faster may be true, but its much later because we are cooler. I guess that kinda shoots a hole in the whole theory.

Farnorth's picture
Farnorth
Offline
Joined: 5/23/02

hunter77 Said:
One flaw with his theory.  The mountains have been cooler than average, heck we have  been cooler on the plains as well.  So saying that the snowpack is melting faster may be true, but its much later because we are cooler. I guess that kinda shoots a hole in the whole theory.

Nobody knows what affect mankind is having on Climate Change.

What makes the whole discussion impossible though is uninformed comments like you just made.

If you study the theory behind melting of polar ice packs, you will find that added water to the oceans will COOL ocean temps and destroy maritime currents that WARM our latitudes overall.  So, the true global warming theory would result in a kind of Ice Age here and not warmer temps.

Our climate on a year-by-year basis is heavily influenced by things like La Nina and El Nino.  I'm sure you've heard about that right?  Well, those things are due to a couple degrees or less difference in Ocean Temps WAY out in the Pacific.  We KNOW the effects of that are REAL because we've seen it.

As usual, the extreme ends of the whole issue are populated with idiots with an agenda.  And, as usual, the best place to be is in the middle and people should affect what they can control.  It is always a good idea to conserve our natural resources and avoid waste.  I'll do stuff like that and let the whackos on either end of the debate kill themselves fighting over it.

zogman's picture
zogman
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 1/23/02

Farnorth Said:

As usual, the extreme ends of the whole issue are populated with idiots with an agenda.  And, as usual, the best place to be is in the middle and people should affect what they can control.  It is always a good idea to conserve our natural resources and avoid waste.  I'll do stuff like that and let the whackos on either end of the debate kill themselves fighting over it.

AGREE............

"If God didn't want us to hunt, He wouldn't have given us plaid shirts; I only kill in self defense—what would you do if a rabbit pulled a knife on you?"

Floyd R. Turbo

red_label's picture
red_label
Offline
Joined: 9/7/07

I just wonder what caused the global cool down period that brough the glaciers to our part of the world.  What then caused the earth to warm up and melt the glaciers?  Also didn't the dinosaurs die because of a global cooling period?  Was this caused by man or maybe it was a natural cycle in the temperatures of the earth.  Could it be that the same thing that caused these shifts in climate could be effecting our climate today?

multi-species-angler's picture
multi-species-angler
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 4/26/09
This combination of high snowfall and quick snow melt has overwhelmed the dam system that was built years back before global warming effects were factored in. Once again, as in the 1930s, we are learning the hard way.

Uh yea, because the climate has never changed in the 4.5 billion years the earth has existed, everything was perfect until we started keeping records about a hundred years ago (one really old mans lifetime).  For cripes sake, there's fish fossils at the tops of the rocky mountains, but I'm sure the author of this article would tell you that was from the great flood when Noah had 2 of every species on his boat, not because two of earth's ever moving plates pushing into eachother and heaving a once ocean floor upward into what is now the rockies over the course of millions of years.

According to Greg Pederson of the Survey, the warming trend they found means that precipitation over the mountains is more often falling as rain instead of snow, and when it does fall as snow, it's melting more quickly.

And it's not just Rockies' snow mass or polar icecaps that are melting faster than usual; it's also snowpack up north that feeds into rivers such as the Mouse.

Thawing is happening differently now, faster, more all at once, and the unusual combination of heavy snowfall and quicker snowmelt is more than our flood control system was designed to handle.

In evaluating the current flooding, we need to factor in global warming. The evidence suggests that the "perfect storm" we are experiencing is not just Mother Nature's doing; we've all had a hand in creating it.

differently according to when?  the last few decades? as opposed to what? the last few billion years?  I love how people use the word "trend" based on 100 years (yes just one longer than average human lifetime) of record keeping.  thats like walking outside in ND in January and stating that ND is always -30 below and snow covered as a fact, then cry "it's the end of the world" when it all starts melting in march.

The polar ice caps have melted and refroze dozens of times since water first collected on this planet 4 billion years ago, the earth has been completely encased in ice and completely burnt to a crisp and it will probably do it over and over again wether we are here or not.  the ever moving tectonic plates are constantly moving and folding under one another forever recycling the surface of this planet, creating new mountains, new islands, new continents, new oceans, and yes...new climates.

One massive solar flare and the tires on this guy's Prius will melt off just like the ones on my pickup.

speaking of a prius, lets go blow $20,000 on a new "green" car and get rid of the one thats already paid off (thats called going green and saving money in the 21st century)  everyone in Hollywood is doing it, go buy that "green" car and continue to heat and cool that 50,000 sq foot mansion that uses a small community's share of water just to keep the grass green.

They are still doing research on "cow farts"...yes cow farts, governments around the world are spending money for "researchers" to determine how detrimental livestock is to the enviroment from all the methane it produces.  Ok so what about the millions of wildebeast farting their way accross africa along with every other plant eating mammal on earth?  what about all the trillions of tons of decomposing plant and animal matter constantly producing more methane in 5 minutes than all the cow farts in the last hundred years combined.  yes some of your tax dollars have paid for this crap.

the only fact about the whole global warming going green climate change subject is that its a giant agenda filled steamy pile of bull$#!& ! that 99% of americans are eating with a spoon and a smile.

aba's picture
aba
Offline
Joined: 12/16/01

I'm surprised he didn't blame Bush also.

Sum1's picture
Sum1
Offline
Joined: 1/12/08

multi-species-angler Said:
They are still doing research on "cow farts"...yes cow farts, governments around the world are spending money for "researchers" to determine how detrimental livestock is to the enviroment from all the methane it produces.  Ok so what about the millions of wildebeast farting their way accross africa along with every other plant eating mammal on earth?  what about all the trillions of tons of decomposing plant and animal matter constantly producing more methane in 5 minutes than all the cow farts in the last hundred years combined.  yes some of your tax dollars have paid for this crap.

You forgot humans in that equation. I knew a feller that counted his farts one day. The total was 147. Could be why the Libs want to eradicate some homosapiens.

 "Play it Mr.Toot"

Tim Sandstrom's picture
Tim Sandstrom
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 7/14/03

I knew it was just a matter of time and this would come out.  Some people simply need job security and this is one of them.


 

 

Kirsch's Outdoor Products | Fargo, ND | 701-261-9017 Garmin GPS Hunting Maps
Liebel's Guide Service | Williston, ND | 701-770-6746 liebelsguideservice.com
Jig-em-Up Guide Service | Grand Forks, ND | 701-739-9198 jig-em-up-guide-service.com

 

 
scary man's picture
scary man
Offline
Joined: 4/23/11

read in the forum today that sunspots significantly change temps on earth, more sunspots mean warmer temps, and vice versa, a few years ago when the global warming thing was really being broght out by the media and Al Gourde, we had more sun spots. and climate is defined as the average weather and temps over a vvvvvvveeeeeeeeerrrrrrrrrrrrrryyyyyyyyyyyyy lllllllllllllllllllooooooooooooooooooonnnnnnnnnnnnggggggggggggg period of time, not 100 years.

free thinker = no thinker

fish-head's picture
fish-head
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 8/21/07

This La Nina sucks! as far as the rest of it.....who knows. We all know what is bad for the earth, well maybe some of what is bad. Listening to the radio on Thursday night they were talking about the demise of the bees. One idea was cellular phone transmissions and another was GMO seed. Do people just look around and say " well that's new so it has to be the reason why". We should conserve our natural resources and find ways not to pollute our planet. The planet and nature will keep on changing no matter what. It would be good to feel like we weren't the reason on some part of the "change".

"A true friend is one who overlooks your failures and tolerates your sucesses"

svnmag's picture
svnmag
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 11/3/02

I like the Earth and it's trees.

 Nuke the Whales

SHORTHAIRSRUS's picture
SHORTHAIRSRUS
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 11/24/04

fish-head Said:
This La Nina sucks! as far as the rest of it.....who knows. We all know what is bad for the earth, well maybe some of what is bad. Listening to the radio on Thursday night they were talking about the demise of the bees. One idea was cellular phone transmissions and another was GMO seed. Do people just look around and say " well that's new so it has to be the reason why". We should conserve our natural resources and find ways not to pollute our planet. The planet and nature will keep on changing no matter what. It would be good to feel like we weren't the reason on some part of the "change".

La Nina and the lack of sun spots -- its that simple ---- i would give anything to wake up tommorow and look up and see some smoke from a coal stack.   Bring it on !

Stay thirsty my friends

doublebarrelsaloon's picture
doublebarrelsaloon
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 4/22/09

Bullheader Said:
read in the forum today that sunspots significantly change temps on earth, more sunspots mean warmer temps, and vice versa, a few years ago when the global warming thing was really being broght out by the media and Al Gourde, we had more sun spots. and climate is defined as the average weather and temps over a vvvvvvveeeeeeeeerrrrrrrrrrrrrryyyyyyyyyyyyy lllllllllllllllllllooooooooooooooooooonnnnnnnnnnnnggggggggggggg period of time, not 100 years.

We have been close to a low of sunspot activity recently, sunspot activity cycles through every 11 years. Athough scientists predict that activity will go into a sort of "hibernation" which some think will significantly cool off earth but like during the so-called "little ice age" in the 16-1700s. Most dont think it will be that extreme however. Again this is just a new prediction based on observations. One of the cool things I heard about when reading about this was all the things that scientists actually observe when looking at the sun, polar activity, flares, storms, a jet stream etc..

I dont go around guessing cup sizes either I just know a nice rack when I see one.

multi-species-angler's picture
multi-species-angler
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 4/26/09

Just for the record, I'm not pro-pollution, but lets at least use common sense and un-biased facts before we all start recycling our own feces in the morning so we can have supper in the evening.

Hardwaterman's picture
Hardwaterman
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 11/6/02

This subject is one that has no concrete answer either way. My take on it is that man and our egos simply cannot accept our insignificance. Thus many must have the warming of our planet be man made. Yet others have an internal fear that calamity is going to come. Then there are the others who for various reasons have no instinct of preservation will use up the last of everything with no thought to the future.

Is the earth warming? It has been on a steady up tick since the ice age ended, with some dips like the little ice age. Man has been able to record temps since the 1800's and today more accurately than ever before. We have theory on what temps where in the past and we have computer projections of what conditions will be in the future.

The key to all of this is man themselves, when it comes to data we can and do make mistakes, and sometimes the data is manipulated to arrive at a pre determined outcome. Manipulation is not limited to one side of this debate. What this has done is cloud the issue and allowed it to become a political money machine.

What I do know is that if the data is correct,  our earth has been a lot warmer overall than it is today and is projected to be in the future.CO2 levels as well have been higher by 20 times with life flourishing on the planet. I have a hard time accepting a lot of the so called AGW talk as being legitimate because science has always created a crisis in order to generate funding.

So is the flooding a result of global warming, I think it is, just as it has in the past and will again in the future. Is the global warming a natural trend or man made that has no answer!

In my lifetime I have seen fence row to fence row farming and the return of CRP and game to the landscape.Now we face again the prosepect of fence row to fence row again! Sportsman are our own worst enemy in that we fail to look forward and focus to much on the now!

hunter77's picture
hunter77
Offline
Joined: 1/15/03

Farnorth Said:

hunter77 Said:
One flaw with his theory.  The mountains have been cooler than average, heck we have  been cooler on the plains as well.  So saying that the snowpack is melting faster may be true, but its much later because we are cooler. I guess that kinda shoots a hole in the whole theory.

Nobody knows what affect mankind is having on Climate Change.

What makes the whole discussion impossible though is uninformed comments like you just made.

If you study the theory behind melting of polar ice packs, you will find that added water to the oceans will COOL ocean temps and destroy maritime currents that WARM our latitudes overall.  So, the true global warming theory would result in a kind of Ice Age here and not warmer temps.

Our climate on a year-by-year basis is heavily influenced by things like La Nina and El Nino.  I'm sure you've heard about that right?  Well, those things are due to a couple degrees or less difference in Ocean Temps WAY out in the Pacific.  We KNOW the effects of that are REAL because we've seen it.

As usual, the extreme ends of the whole issue are populated with idiots with an agenda.  And, as usual, the best place to be is in the middle and people should affect what they can control.  It is always a good idea to conserve our natural resources and avoid waste.  I'll do stuff like that and let the whackos on either end of the debate kill themselves fighting over it.

  Yeah, your way too educated for me to even comment on this subject.  You are wrong on your theory about cooling oceans.  What happens is that oceans warm and becomes less dense and occupy more surface area, thus changing weather, climate, life, and many other things.  The oceans will rise from more runoff, but its not enough "cooling" to overcome the overall rise in atmosphereic temperature. 
  But anyway, you live the way you want to, but I promise you have zero effect on the earth by conserving what you use in your daily life.  But if it makes you feel all warm and cuddly inside by all means.  The earth goes through natural cycles and will warm and cool all on its own.
   You don't have to have a degree in science of climate change to know that whatever the weather pattern is it will be blamed on global warming, if its dry, cool, hot, wet, stormy, etc..... 

Bowhuntin's picture
Bowhuntin
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 11/17/03

Al Gore is getting richer and richer flying around in a fricking private 737 jet lecturing on how the rest of us Americans should cease our use of fossil fuels and how America is the cause of global warming but nobody ever says anything about the deforestation of the rain forests the past 50 years in South America. Trees convert CO2 to oxygen, the rain forests have gotten significantly smaller the same time the CO2 levels have risen, I wonder if anyone ever looked at that as being part of the cause?

BringingTheRain's picture
BringingTheRain
Offline
Joined: 1/5/10

Silly hippies, everyone knows God caused this flood.

multi-species-angler's picture
multi-species-angler
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 4/26/09

Bowhuntin Said:
Al Gore is getting richer and richer flying around in a fricking private 737 jet lecturing on how the rest of us Americans should cease our use of fossil fuels and how America is the cause of global warming but nobody ever says anything about the deforestation of the rain forests the past 50 years in South America. Trees convert CO2 to oxygen, the rain forests have gotten significantly smaller the same time the CO2 levels have risen, I wonder if anyone ever looked at that as being part of the cause?

actually there was a very informative, yet unpopular article in the last month or so ago on several global studies that revealed the planet is more efficient at converting and storing co2 today than it was 50 years ago.  I'll try and find a link to it.

one has to remember the rainforests of south america isn't the only thing using up co2.  look at the billions if not trillions of tons of phyto plankton and algae in the worlds oceans and of course the other dense forests around the world.

Farnorth's picture
Farnorth
Offline
Joined: 5/23/02

hunter77 Said:

Farnorth Said:

hunter77 Said:
One flaw with his theory.  The mountains have been cooler than average, heck we have  been cooler on the plains as well.  So saying that the snowpack is melting faster may be true, but its much later because we are cooler. I guess that kinda shoots a hole in the whole theory.

Nobody knows what affect mankind is having on Climate Change.

What makes the whole discussion impossible though is uninformed comments like you just made.

If you study the theory behind melting of polar ice packs, you will find that added water to the oceans will COOL ocean temps and destroy maritime currents that WARM our latitudes overall.  So, the true global warming theory would result in a kind of Ice Age here and not warmer temps.

Our climate on a year-by-year basis is heavily influenced by things like La Nina and El Nino.  I'm sure you've heard about that right?  Well, those things are due to a couple degrees or less difference in Ocean Temps WAY out in the Pacific.  We KNOW the effects of that are REAL because we've seen it.

As usual, the extreme ends of the whole issue are populated with idiots with an agenda.  And, as usual, the best place to be is in the middle and people should affect what they can control.  It is always a good idea to conserve our natural resources and avoid waste.  I'll do stuff like that and let the whackos on either end of the debate kill themselves fighting over it.

  Yeah, your way too educated for me to even comment on this subject.  You are wrong on your theory about cooling oceans.  What happens is that oceans warm and becomes less dense and occupy more surface area, thus changing weather, climate, life, and many other things.  The oceans will rise from more runoff, but its not enough "cooling" to overcome the overall rise in atmosphereic temperature. 
  But anyway, you live the way you want to, but I promise you have zero effect on the earth by conserving what you use in your daily life.  But if it makes you feel all warm and cuddly inside by all means.  The earth goes through natural cycles and will warm and cool all on its own.
   You don't have to have a degree in science of climate change to know that whatever the weather pattern is it will be blamed on global warming, if its dry, cool, hot, wet, stormy, etc..... 

So, basically you are saying that a couple years of cooler temps in the mountains proves that the Earth is not warming?   I'm not really sure if it is or not but you certainly know all about it.

My actions have no affect on the planet?  So, I shouldn't worry about pollution in my life?  I might as well dump my waste oil in the ditch or down the drain?  The world will NEVER run out of oil so our consumption does not matter in the slightest?  Now I really feel all cuddly inside.  I now have nothing to worry about.  I feel much better.

hunter77's picture
hunter77
Offline
Joined: 1/15/03

Farnorth Said:

hunter77 Said:

Farnorth Said:

hunter77 Said:
One flaw with his theory.  The mountains have been cooler than average, heck we have  been cooler on the plains as well.  So saying that the snowpack is melting faster may be true, but its much later because we are cooler. I guess that kinda shoots a hole in the whole theory.

Nobody knows what affect mankind is having on Climate Change.

What makes the whole discussion impossible though is uninformed comments like you just made.

If you study the theory behind melting of polar ice packs, you will find that added water to the oceans will COOL ocean temps and destroy maritime currents that WARM our latitudes overall.  So, the true global warming theory would result in a kind of Ice Age here and not warmer temps.

Our climate on a year-by-year basis is heavily influenced by things like La Nina and El Nino.  I'm sure you've heard about that right?  Well, those things are due to a couple degrees or less difference in Ocean Temps WAY out in the Pacific.  We KNOW the effects of that are REAL because we've seen it.

As usual, the extreme ends of the whole issue are populated with idiots with an agenda.  And, as usual, the best place to be is in the middle and people should affect what they can control.  It is always a good idea to conserve our natural resources and avoid waste.  I'll do stuff like that and let the whackos on either end of the debate kill themselves fighting over it.

  Yeah, your way too educated for me to even comment on this subject.  You are wrong on your theory about cooling oceans.  What happens is that oceans warm and becomes less dense and occupy more surface area, thus changing weather, climate, life, and many other things.  The oceans will rise from more runoff, but its not enough "cooling" to overcome the overall rise in atmosphereic temperature. 
  But anyway, you live the way you want to, but I promise you have zero effect on the earth by conserving what you use in your daily life.  But if it makes you feel all warm and cuddly inside by all means.  The earth goes through natural cycles and will warm and cool all on its own.
   You don't have to have a degree in science of climate change to know that whatever the weather pattern is it will be blamed on global warming, if its dry, cool, hot, wet, stormy, etc..... 

So, basically you are saying that a couple years of cooler temps in the mountains proves that the Earth is not warming?   I'm not really sure if it is or not but you certainly know all about it.

My actions have no affect on the planet?  So, I shouldn't worry about pollution in my life?  I might as well dump my waste oil in the ditch or down the drain?  The world will NEVER run out of oil so our consumption does not matter in the slightest?  Now I really feel all cuddly inside.  I now have nothing to worry about.  I feel much better.

How do you know we are not starting a coooling cycle?  It seems to happen every 100 years or so.   No, you dumping oil in the ditch or whatever will not destroy the planet.  The earth has a way of cleaning itself, and you personally have no effect.  Just like the oil spills, the doom and gloom never happened. Sure some short term negative effects occured, but the ocean will be back to normal soon.  I'm not saying pollute to your hearts content, but its not like we can destroy the whole planet by driving a pickup truck, and not recycling our aluminum cans.

aba's picture
aba
Offline
Joined: 12/16/01

Did dinosaur"s drive SUV'S???????

cynical's picture
cynical
Offline
Joined: 10/27/04

aba Said:
Did dinosaur"s drive SUV'S???????

They must have since they went extinct.  

"The only enemy of guns is rust and politicians."

"The best defense against usurpatory government is an assertive citizenry."

William F. Buckley, Jr.
"Unarmed helplessness is for sheep and the French."  Ted Nugent

"The beauty of the second amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it."
 -Thomas Jefferson

The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.
-Thomas Jefferson

 

 

johnr's picture
johnr
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 2/18/04

In 1983 our science class was discussing the coming of an Ice age and how the world was cooling...
what happened to many farting cows?
I couldnt agree with hunter 77 more.
Algore needs a swift kick in the bean bag for becoming the poster girl for this hoax

Neat

Bowhuntin's picture
Bowhuntin
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 11/17/03

multi-species-angler Said:

Bowhuntin Said:
Al Gore is getting richer and richer flying around in a fricking private 737 jet lecturing on how the rest of us Americans should cease our use of fossil fuels and how America is the cause of global warming but nobody ever says anything about the deforestation of the rain forests the past 50 years in South America. Trees convert CO2 to oxygen, the rain forests have gotten significantly smaller the same time the CO2 levels have risen, I wonder if anyone ever looked at that as being part of the cause?

actually there was a very informative, yet unpopular article in the last month or so ago on several global studies that revealed the planet is more efficient at converting and storing co2 today than it was 50 years ago.  I'll try and find a link to it.

one has to remember the rainforests of south america isn't the only thing using up co2.  look at the billions if not trillions of tons of phyto plankton and algae in the worlds oceans and of course the other dense forests around the world.

Yes, understood. Crops also convert CO2 into oxygen and retain the carbon however Al Gore and his cronnies never talk about that stuff, just about how we must stop burning coal, diesel and gasoline. As they fly around in private jets spreading the gloom and doom word. 

fishmahn's picture
fishmahn
Offline
Joined: 12/30/10

Climate change occurs when other variables enter the formula.  When the solar activity increases the planet warms.  Types of emissions into our atmospere such as volcanoes erupting reflect sunlight and cool the earth.  Green house gases emitted warm the planet by letting heat in but not allowing it to exit at the same rate.
Climate has changed inthe past due to things such as the meteorite hitting the Yucatan and essentially destorying the majority of life  forms at that time.
We are most definitely a player now with the co2 emissions we're are releasing.  To say climate changed before and it's naturalso don't be concerned is rediculous to me.  That's like saying it's flooded in the past so it's just a natural phenomenon.  That doesn't mean we can't do the samew by knocking out a dam. 
Remember what happened to life in many cases in the past when the climatic tables were tipped.  In many cases it was extinction or near extinction for many species.  Everyones' heard the fringes making outlandish statements but in truth just look at which national scientific institutions endorse the fact  of anthropagneic climate change.  There are no national or major scientific facilities that dispute it.

Hardwaterman's picture
Hardwaterman
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 11/6/02

fish your statement is so full of misconceptions it is hilarious. You talk of CO2 as if it is the driver of all climate change. What is known today about CO2 is not much more than we knew in 1900 in regards to its affect on climate. There are those who theorize that CO2 is the driver and as concentrations go up so does temp. Others theorize that CO2 level rise is a result of lagging effects of cooling periods.

http://geocraft.com/WVFossils/Carboniferous_climate.html

Here is just one credible link to dispute this and it explains it well the impact that man is actually having on the normal CO2 levels. I am not posting this to say one is right and the other wrong. Simply pointing out that your conclusions are not factual based but driven by the rhetoric you have listened to.

In my lifetime I have seen fence row to fence row farming and the return of CRP and game to the landscape.Now we face again the prosepect of fence row to fence row again! Sportsman are our own worst enemy in that we fail to look forward and focus to much on the now!

Hardwaterman's picture
Hardwaterman
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 11/6/02

From the research paper summary I posted above! The clearest statement on climate issues I have ever seen!

What will our climate be like in the future? That is the question scientists are asking and seeking answers to currently. The causes of "global warming" and climate change are today being popularly described in terms of human activities. However, climate change is something that happens constantly on its own. If humans are in fact altering Earth's climate with our cars, electrical powerplants, and factories these changes must be larger than the natural climate variability in order to be measurable. So far the signal of a discernible human contribution to global climate change has not emerged from this natural variability or background noise.

In my lifetime I have seen fence row to fence row farming and the return of CRP and game to the landscape.Now we face again the prosepect of fence row to fence row again! Sportsman are our own worst enemy in that we fail to look forward and focus to much on the now!

Lane's picture
Lane
Offline
Joined: 4/20/02

  I have some pictures of the "highway to the sun" in northwest Montana dated June 4 2011,could barely see the visitors center for snow and some drifts were estimated at 25 ft deep,this was at Glacier National parkI have traveled that road so know the area.,If I knew how to put them on here I would.,Global warming?

fishmahn's picture
fishmahn
Offline
Joined: 12/30/10

Hardwaterman,
You obviously haven't read the papers concerning the very study you listed concerning past time sequences of high co2  in relation to what]'s happening right now..  I have a client and I'll post a portion of it later.  This blurb you speak of has been discussed for years and never mentions what was going on with the ocean biodiveristy, lower intensity sun etc at that time period.  The basic things I listed are not rhetoric but accepted fact by over 95% of the world scientific community. 

svnmag's picture
svnmag
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 11/3/02

Oh great he has a Global Warming client.  Watch out boys he's probably trolling for a lawsuit of some sort.  He's tired of arguing with a chair in his house so he aggravates us.  And he's going to say mentally or otherwise that he is indeed arguing with chairs on this site.

 Nuke the Whales

Hardwaterman's picture
Hardwaterman
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 11/6/02

You mean those scientist who are seeking funding for more studies on AGW!

Where there is money there is fraud,corruption and subtrifuge to advance the research funding stream. The summary I posted is one of many that questions the volume aspect of CO2 as a driver. There are hosts of others as well that have been peer reviewed,published etc....

So as far as understanding this, I understand clearly that the science is incomplete to a level as to cause and affect to not be credible or defendible in a court of law one way or the other.

In my lifetime I have seen fence row to fence row farming and the return of CRP and game to the landscape.Now we face again the prosepect of fence row to fence row again! Sportsman are our own worst enemy in that we fail to look forward and focus to much on the now!

bigguy1's picture
bigguy1
Offline
Joined: 12/12/06

Ah Fishmahn,
Go to www.petitionproject.org to see the alternate view from the scientific community. The letter sent to Congress and the White House by Dr. Frederic Seitz, President of Rockefeller University and past President of the National Academy of Science, takes a different view of the discussion of Anthropomorphic Global Warming. The letter and petition has been signed by over 31,000 scientists in the U.S. alone. The list of scientists and scholars includes over 9,000 Phd's and represents institutions such as MIT, Yale, Harvard, Berkely, Cal Poly, Oxford, and more. Just because someone says 95% of the scientific community believe in man-made global warming, doesn't make it true.
 

fishmahn's picture
fishmahn
Offline
Joined: 12/30/10

Been there and have seen the petition. As far as consensus globally there are still 97% that believe differently.the scientific field of climate studies

fishmahn's picture
fishmahn
Offline
Joined: 12/30/10

the scientific field of climate studies

fishmahn's picture
fishmahn
Offline
Joined: 12/30/10

the consensus is demonstrated by the number of scientists who have stopped arguing about what is causing climate change

fishmahn's picture
fishmahn
Offline
Joined: 12/30/10

Trying to paste an article doesn't seem to transfer.

eyexer's picture
eyexer
Offline
Joined: 2/28/07

Hardwaterman Said:
You mean those scientist who are seeking funding for more studies on AGW!

Where there is money there is fraud,corruption and subtrifuge to advance the research funding stream. The summary I posted is one of many that questions the volume aspect of CO2 as a driver. There are hosts of others as well that have been peer reviewed,published etc....

So as far as understanding this, I understand clearly that the science is incomplete to a level as to cause and affect to not be credible or defendible in a court of law one way or the other.

I'm sure it's the same list of scientists that all jumped in bed with the global warming crowd.  then later became the climate change crowd.  then later became the clean the egg off your face crowd.  given all the info that has surfaced surrounding this crowd the past two years they now have zero credibility.

 

eyexer's picture
eyexer
Offline
Joined: 2/28/07

Hardwaterman Said:
You mean those scientist who are seeking funding for more studies on AGW!

Where there is money there is fraud,corruption and subtrifuge to advance the research funding stream. The summary I posted is one of many that questions the volume aspect of CO2 as a driver. There are hosts of others as well that have been peer reviewed,published etc....

So as far as understanding this, I understand clearly that the science is incomplete to a level as to cause and affect to not be credible or defendible in a court of law one way or the other.

I'm sure it's the same list of scientists that all jumped in bed with the global warming crowd.  then later became the climate change crowd.  then later became the clean the egg off your face crowd.  given all the info that has surfaced surrounding this crowd the past two years they now have zero credibility.

 

eyexer's picture
eyexer
Offline
Joined: 2/28/07

Hardwaterman Said:
You mean those scientist who are seeking funding for more studies on AGW!

Where there is money there is fraud,corruption and subtrifuge to advance the research funding stream. The summary I posted is one of many that questions the volume aspect of CO2 as a driver. There are hosts of others as well that have been peer reviewed,published etc....

So as far as understanding this, I understand clearly that the science is incomplete to a level as to cause and affect to not be credible or defendible in a court of law one way or the other.

I'm sure it's the same list of scientists that all jumped in bed with the global warming crowd.  then later became the climate change crowd.  then later became the clean the egg off your face crowd.  given all the info that has surfaced surrounding this crowd the past two years they now have zero credibility.

fishmahn Said:
Been there and have seen the petition. As far as consensus globally there are still 97% that believe differently.the scientific field of climate studies

Since it's such a well known thing I'm sure the list of these 97% of all scientist is readily available.  I'm just dyeing to see it.

 

fishmahn's picture
fishmahn
Offline
Joined: 12/30/10

For the record unless you people haven't seen, Even Exxon Mobile has made a statement admitting mans part in the current global warming situation.
Co2 is just one part of the puzzle. If you go back also to the Ordivician I'm aware of high co2 levels. Glaciation was occurring at this time. There were also other variables such as very low ocean temperatures which created a huge absorption for co2 comsumption. Also the taconic orogeny which also created a great comsumption of co2. The sun was much dimmer that raises the co2 threshold for glaciation to a staggering 3000 ppmv.
One must look at coincidences of situations for either cooling or warming of our planet. The scientific community as a whole is behind man made global warming as the variables stack up during our lifetime. the 31,000 mentioned above is a tiny piece of the worlds scientfic community.

fishmahn's picture
fishmahn
Offline
Joined: 12/30/10

eyexer- To name a few, the intergovernmental Panel on Climate change, the national climatic data center, The US National Academy of Sciences and....NASA. The list is too long to put here. You can look them up quite easily.

bigguy1's picture
bigguy1
Offline
Joined: 12/12/06

Apparently this group of scientists doesn't believe you Fismahn. And you may want to research the IPCC before holding them up as experts.

Taking a group of fellow scientists to task for alarmism and flawed analysis, a leading group of scientists published an open letter to Congress this week refuting much of the data indicating that the earth is warming. The latest back and forth between scientists comes as Democrats and the Obama administration continue to push for cap-and-trade taxes and environmental regulations on the amount of carbon emissions being created by business.

climate,change,letter,william,gray,easterbrookThese “climate alarmists who appear to be unaware of ‘what is happening to our planet's climate,’ as well as the vast amount of research that has produced that knowledge,’ states the letter signed by, among others, William Gray, one of the nation’s leading experts on hurricanes. Gray, who teaches at Colorado State University, creates a predication of hurricanes every year that generally has tremendous accuracy.

Specifically, the group was responding a letter written Jan. 28 by 18 scientists to members of the U.S. House stating that global warming is a fact, and that the earth is heading toward calamity if carbon emissions are not curbed. But Gray and the others warned that there is ample evidence on the record refuting these alarmist conjectures.

“A lengthy review of their claims and others that climate alarmists frequently make can be found on the Web site of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change (see Carbon Dioxide and Earth's Future: Pursuing the Prudent Path),” the new letter states. “That report offers a point-by-point rebuttal of all of the claims of the "group of eighteen," citing in every case peer-reviewed scientific research on the actual effects of climate change during the past several decades.”

The letter asks if recent reports “provide any real-world evidence of Earth's seas inundating coastal lowlands around the globe? No. Increased human mortality? No. Plant and animal extinctions? No. Declining vegetative productivity? No. More frequent and deadly coral bleaching? No. Marine life dissolving away in acidified oceans? No.

“Quite to the contrary, in fact, these reports provide extensive empirical evidence that these things are not happening. And in many of these areas, the referenced papers report finding just the opposite response to global warming, i.e., biosphere-friendly effects of rising temperatures and rising CO2 levels.”

Read more on Newsmax.com: Scientists Publish Letter Blasting Global Warming 'Alarmists'
Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama's Re-Election? Vote Here Now!

bigguy1's picture
bigguy1
Offline
Joined: 12/12/06

Fishmahn since you like to look at websites, here are a couple more that apparently are not part of your 97% estimate.
www.nipcc.org www.co2science.org

eyexer's picture
eyexer
Offline
Joined: 2/28/07

fishmahn Said:
eyexer- To name a few, the intergovernmental Panel on Climate change, the national climatic data center, The US National Academy of Sciences and....NASA. The list is too long to put here. You can look them up quite easily.

oh you mean all the government funded organizations lol.

 

eyexer's picture
eyexer
Offline
Joined: 2/28/07

fishmahn Said:
For the record unless you people haven't seen, Even Exxon Mobile has made a statement admitting mans part in the current global warming situation.
Co2 is just one part of the puzzle. If you go back also to the Ordivician I'm aware of high co2 levels. Glaciation was occurring at this time. There were also other variables such as very low ocean temperatures which created a huge absorption for co2 comsumption. Also the taconic orogeny which also created a great comsumption of co2. The sun was much dimmer that raises the co2 threshold for glaciation to a staggering 3000 ppmv.
One must look at coincidences of situations for either cooling or warming of our planet. The scientific community as a whole is behind man made global warming as the variables stack up during our lifetime. the 31,000 mentioned above is a tiny piece of the worlds scientfic community.

and I"m sure that wasn't a PR ploy by exxon,lol

 

bucksnbears's picture
bucksnbears
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 5/5/07

Fishmahn... been huntin or fishing at all ???. hows it been?? crawlers or leeches??  just wondering

the more food you have in your mouth, the better you can taste it !!

Hardwaterman's picture
Hardwaterman
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 11/6/02

bigguy do not be to hard on him, after all he has to at least pretend he believes his client has a case otherwise taking money would be unethical!!!!!!!!!!

I listed the one piece only as an example of counter research and peer reviewed material that holds a different position than AGW is FACT!!!!!!!!!

A while back I had a list of all Gov sponsored research into GW and the money trail is clear, if you came back with a report stating that facts found not facts produced to meet a predetermined outcome, funding for follow up research was cut or not granted at all. But if you where the tail wagging the dog you got research money as long as it fit into the carbon is bad criteria.

CO2 makes up .039% of the atmosphere. Or if the atmosphere was a football field, CO2 would take up 1.5 inches. 93% of all CO2 is found in the oceans and these same scientists that insist that AGW is fact have had to recant a lot about the oceans and their ablity to take in more CO2 without the dreaded acidification that they claim was going to happen.

Even the IPCC which has little real credibility after the last two publication manipulations, has said that we really do not understand the true mechanism of the oceans cleansing capacity! They worked on the belief that carbon in and carbon out was neutral from the oceans, but with increases in carbons in the atmosphere, the oceans are taking in more CO2 and the acidification rates are way below projections!

So as I stated before fish your knowledge of this is much less than you really think if you believe that AGW is a fact and can be proven! It is an evolving theory that is evolving and many who once held hard beliefs that Armageddon was near, are now being awakened to the fact that research and science is far, far away from having a handle on it. Especially when all the computer models used to project this cannot duplicate the past climates they supposedly are using as a base line!

In my lifetime I have seen fence row to fence row farming and the return of CRP and game to the landscape.Now we face again the prosepect of fence row to fence row again! Sportsman are our own worst enemy in that we fail to look forward and focus to much on the now!

Pages