Scientists respond to Gore's warnings . . .

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TimBikes @ Jun 29 2006, 01:17 AM) [snapback]278459[/snapback]</div>

Maybe because the argument's been discredited about a million times over (yeah, I exaggerate). And the source isn't particularly credible.

Gosh, what a concept.

Carter's a nutjob. Next will someone quote Rev Moon on the hit-and-run play in baseball? That seems just as reasonable and relevant.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(maineprius947 @ Jun 16 2006, 12:23 PM) [snapback]272350[/snapback]</div>

Dennis, you seem well informed, so I'll ask you this. In a recent issue of Astronomy Magazine, they noted the shrinking of the Martian ice caps at a rate of 10' per year. Not much other information given in the short article, just that they noted that the Martian atmosphere appears to be warming. This seems to buttress the idea that some natural (or rather, non-man-made) cause could be at work, such as an increase in solar radiation, etc. Have any of your sources dealt with this observation yet?

 

One of my sources factored in solar radiation... and found that humans were contributing. Given what I know about the greenhouse effect, if solar radiation has risen and continues to rise then it is all the more important that we reduce greenhouse gas emissions... the more energy that reaches the earth, the more greenhouse gases, the warmer it gets beyond the potential impact of solar radiation.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Mirza @ Jul 18 2006, 09:04 AM) [snapback]288178[/snapback]</div>

I know that solar radiation was the question a number of years ago, when it wasn't in the original calculations. But I would think that once that was pointed out ... as it was by a scientist who was working on sun studies at the observatory in Los Angeles (Mt. Wilson?) ... that the sun would be factored into all the equations.

The polar ice cap on Mars is shrinking at a rate of about 10 miles per year, but the very brief photo and description in Astronomy didn't say how much of a percentage that was, or if it was less than, the same as or more than the observable changes here on earth (adjusted for distance from the sun, etc.) So I was wondering if anyone had actually treated that specific question. I think its an important one, because if we can determine that man is not contributing to the increase in temp on earth, then we can pursue other, less expensive ways to obtain energy independence and clean air and water.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Jul 17 2006, 11:40 PM) [snapback]288001[/snapback]</div>

Well, you can go back to realclimate website (which I have discovered independently, when I was looking up glacialogy journals, to get the unbiased facts on Greenland and Antarctica, unfortunately (because of their limited distribution) the data is for paid-subscribers only, but some of those scientists post on realclimate as well).

Anyway, Mars is completely different from Earth (they mention orbit precession and circularity, and things I'd have to look up), but continuing on:
"Since Mars has no oceans and a thin atmosphere, the thermal inertia is low, and Martian climate is easily perturbed by external influences, including solar variations. However, solar irradiance is now well measured by satellite and has been declining slightly over the last few years as it moves towards a solar minimum."

The "global warming" on Mars seems to be limited to the S. hemisphere (which is now in late summer, remember Mars' seasons are twice as long as ours), and overall Mars is cooler today than it was when we first visited in the 1970's. For more, see:
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archi...arming-on-mars/

 

The original article states that **100's** of scientist experts in climatology dispute human induced global warming on a significant scale.

Could I see a list, please ? I qualify 'expert' as anybody who has published within the past three years in any first tier peer reviewed climatology journal as a first, second, or last author.

I am familiar with three .. although the fellow from alabama has recently taken enough steps back to now say there are *at least* two well respected skeptics remaining.

fshagan, have you perused realclimate.org yet ?
In fact, has *any* of our local skeptics taken a good read of realclimate.org and still remain skeptical ??

 

The way I see it, if the alarmist turn out to be right, "I told you so" is little consolation when you've irreversibly screwed up the earth's climate. Once it get's so bad *everyone* agrees, it will take way too long and be way to late to fix it.

If the alarmists turn out to be wrong, all you end up with is a cleaner environment.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(nerfer @ Jul 19 2006, 01:11 PM) [snapback]288897[/snapback]</div>

Thanks ... that makes a lot more sense to me now. I saw just the brief mention of it, and then I heard it quoted as a proof that solar variations cause warming. And that's true, but I figured someone would have had to look at the science of Mars' warming trend and have the straight scoop on it.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ Jul 22 2006, 04:12 PM) [snapback]290661[/snapback]</div>

To an extent, you're right. It was true for the spray can crowd; while they were never happy with the progress in reducing flourocarbons, the ozone does seem to be repairing itself (or at least it is no longer thinning). You do have to balance benefit/risk all the time, though, as giving up some things (energy required to manufacture vaccines, for instance) would not be smart.

We could all give up our cars and walk everywhere.

 

Thanks for bringing these things to mind fshagan... they need to be discussed and factored in by scientists. I read somewhere that the atmosphere on Mars is 95% Carbon Dioxide, and that the polar ice caps are made of dry ice.... lending more credence to the argument that Mars is especially sensitive to changes in solar irradiance. Dry ice is essentially frozen CO2... and evaporates if you place some in a standard room... and far more quickly than ice would melt.

 

Al Gore is a boring old fossil with credibility issues.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(fshagan @ Jul 22 2006, 06:14 PM) [snapback]290703[/snapback]</div>

Ummmm...the "spray can" crowd achieved raising awareness of a problem, which then got, to a very great extent, fixed...and gee, yeah, now it IS getting better since WE modified OUR behavior. In a realistic fashion. REALISTIC. Unlike everyone giving up all their cars. But now lots of us have stopped throwing quite as much crap into the atmosphere. MAYBE, just MAYBE, if more people wake up and agree to pitch in, then other problems MAY start correcting themselves...with OUR help by not continuing to ADD MORE MORE MORE to the problems.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(RichBoy @ Jul 30 2006, 03:55 PM) [snapback]294763[/snapback]</div>

Thanks RichBoy, for your obviously well thought out and credible comment, you being a source who is so obviously VERY YOUNG and certainly credible beyond any doubt.

 

Anybody who's a good friend of Carl Sagan is my friend! (Gore)
--
Well said Rafaro!
--
(avoiding FHOP for all the chaos going on there!!!)