Global Warming = Bullshit?

[JimmyTheFish]

Antarctic temperatures disagree with climate model predictions


COLUMBUS , Ohio – A new report on climate over the world's southernmost continent shows that temperatures during the late 20th century did not climb as had been predicted by many global climate models.

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-02/osu-atd021207.php

[ribonucleic]

Antarctic temperatures disagree with climate model predictions


COLUMBUS , Ohio – A new report on climate over the world's southernmost continent shows that temperatures during the late 20th century did not climb as had been predicted by many global climate models.

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-02/osu-atd021207.php

Has Dr. Bromwich's $10,000 check from ExxonMobil cleared yet?

[JimmyTheFish]

Has Dr. Bromwich's $10,000,000,000 check from ExxonMobil cleared yet?

fixed

[BRUCE]

Has Dr. Bromwich's $10,000 check from ExxonMobil cleared yet?

Why is it you believe only Global Warming dissenters have an axe to grind?

[Deedee]

Jimmy, that article doesn't propose that global warming doesn't exist.  It merely says that it's difficult to use global climate models in assessing the effects of climate change on Antarctica.

[ribonucleic]

Why is it you believe only Global Warming dissenters have an axe to grind?

Well, if you want to consider "I don't want to run the risk of my grandchildren dying of starvation after climate-change-induced agricultural collapse" to be a kind of axe-grinding, I guess no one can stop you.

I'll simply point out that those axe-grinders did not find it necessary to offer $10,000 payments to anyone to conclude that global warming is real.

[BRUCE]

I'll simply point out that those axe-grinders did not find it necessary to offer $10,000 payments to anyone to conclude that global warming is real.

No, they simply use the money granted to them by environmental lobbyists to support their standard of living.

[JimmyTheFish]

Jimmy, that article doesn't propose that global warming doesn't exist.  It merely says that it's difficult to use global climate models in assessing the effects of climate change on Antarctica.

Deedee, yes I read the article and although it doesnt deny there is a warming of the planet it doesnt prove it either............

"The best we can say right now is that the climate models are somewhat inconsistent with the evidence that we have for the last 50 years from continental Antarctica .

"We're looking for a small signal that represents the impact of human activity and it is hard to find it at the moment," he said.

[BRUCE]

Deedee, yes I read the article and although it doesnt deny there is a warming of the planet it doesnt prove it either............

"The best we can say right now is that the climate models are somewhat inconsistent with the evidence that we have for the last 50 years from continental Antarctica .

"We're looking for a small signal that represents the impact of human activity and it is hard to find it at the moment," he said.

You're right to be skeptical, let's not declare this debate over yet.

[Deedee]

Deedee, yes I read the article and although it doesnt deny there is a warming of the planet it doesnt prove it either............

"The best we can say right now is that the climate models are somewhat inconsistent with the evidence that we have for the last 50 years from continental Antarctica .

"We're looking for a small signal that represents the impact of human activity and it is hard to find it at the moment," he said.

Yes, but he also give plausible reasons as to why...

"The westerlies have intensified over the last four decades of so, increasing in strength by as much as perhaps 10 to 20 percent," he said. "This is a huge amount of ocean north of Antarctica and we're only now understanding just how important the winds are for things like mixing in the Southern Ocean." The ocean mixing both dissipates heat and absorbs carbon dioxide, one of the key greenhouse gases linked to global warming."

"In some sense, we might have competing effects going on in Antarctica where there is low-level CO2 warming but that may be swamped by the effects of ozone depletion," he said. "The year 2006 was the all-time maximum for ozone depletion over the Antarctic."

It just doesn't seem like the author is offering any kind of conclusion that climate change is not happening.

[JimmyTheFish]

It just doesn't seem like the author is offering any kind of conclusion that climate change is not happening.

nor that it is happening..............

[Deedee]

nor that it is happening..............

But he says the climate models are performing elsewhere in the world. 

"It isn't surprising that these models are not doing as well in these remote parts of the world. These are global models and shouldn't be expected to be equally exact for all locations," he said.

Sounds like he's saying the scientists are able to predict the effects of global warming everywhere except the remote areas.  And offering reasons why it would be more difficult to assess damage in these remote areas.

[BRUCE]

Yes, but he also give plausible reasons as to why...

"The westerlies have intensified over the last four decades of so, increasing in strength by as much as perhaps 10 to 20 percent," he said. "This is a huge amount of ocean north of Antarctica and we're only now understanding just how important the winds are for things like mixing in the Southern Ocean." The ocean mixing both dissipates heat and absorbs carbon dioxide, one of the key greenhouse gases linked to global warming."

"In some sense, we might have competing effects going on in Antarctica where there is low-level CO2 warming but that may be swamped by the effects of ozone depletion," he said. "The year 2006 was the all-time maximum for ozone depletion over the Antarctic."

It just doesn't seem like the author is offering any kind of conclusion that climate change is not happening.

As he shouldn't, you'll find it's mostly the Leftist 'end is nigh' reports that actually conclude things with a bang - so to speak.

Unsurprisingly, these reports get the most media coverage and funding - so why wouldn't they predict gloom?

[Deedee]

Actually, he says the following too. I forgot to include it in my earlier post...

"This is in marked contrast to the northern tip of the Antarctic Peninsula that is one of the most rapidly warming parts of the Earth."

He's only pointing to one section of Antarctica, which isn't performing to spec with global climate models. The article does seem to validate the whole idea of climate change affecting the planet.

[JimmyTheFish]

But he says the climate models are performing elsewhere in the world. 

"It isn't surprising that these models are not doing as well in these remote parts of the world. These are global models and shouldn't be expected to be equally exact for all locations," he said.

Sounds like he's saying the scientists are able to predict the effects of global warming everywhere except the remote areas.  And offering reasons why it would be more difficult to assess damage in these remote areas.

Deedee, I read that as well however he takes no position either way and the fact that he offers no comparable data to the fact of warming or even factoring a ratio of good/bad models regardless of locations makes you wonder what the agenda actually is.......I still say the verdict is out that the earth is going to melt in 50 years

[Camel Jockey]

Antarctic temperatures disagree with climate model predictions


COLUMBUS , Ohio – A new report on climate over the world's southernmost continent shows that temperatures during the late 20th century did not climb as had been predicted by many global climate models.

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-02/osu-atd021207.php

He is discussing Antartica specifically. How can you use one climate model in a remote part of antartica to say global warming is not real? The fact is that parts of Antartica are melting.

[Camel Jockey]

Deedee, I read that as well however he takes no position either way and the fact that he offers no comparable data to the fact of warming or even factoring a ratio of good/bad models regardless of locations makes you wonder what the agenda actually is.......I still say the verdict is out that the earth is going to melt in 50 years

The earth is not going to just melt and we're not gonna be under water any time soon. But steady rise of sea level within decades can be a problem.

[BRUCE]

He is discussing Antartica specifically. How can you use one climate model in a remote part of antartica to say global warming is not real? The fact is that parts of Antartica are melting.

Isn't this testament to how complex the environment is?  Perhaps we know far less than some would have us think.

[JimmyTheFish]

The earth is not going to just melt and we're not gonna be under water any time soon. But steady rise of sea level within decades can be a problem.

my point was that this continuous broad stroke without supporting data is scaring the shit out of people and of course creating revenue streams for others.................. .........therefore the question:

Is Global Warming Bullshit?

[Camel Jockey]

my point was that this continuous broad stroke without supporting data is scaring the shit out of people and of course creating revenue streams for others.................. .........therefore the question:

Is Global Warming Bullshit?

We don't know.

I agree with you in that people should not just automatically jump the gun. But we do need to find out more about climate change, as it can have serious consequences in the future.

[BRUCE]

We don't know.

I agree with you in that people should not just automatically jump the gun. But we do need to find out more about climate change, as it can have serious consequences in the future.

I completely agree.

[JimmyTheFish]

We don't know.

I agree with you in that people should not just automatically jump the gun. But we do need to find out more about climate change, as it can have serious consequences in the future.

There are changes in our climate/environment that you cannot deny are happening.

The human link as the primary cause is what is questionable.

[Deedee]

Deedee, I read that as well however he takes no position either way and the fact that he offers no comparable data to the fact of warming or even factoring a ratio of good/bad models regardless of locations makes you wonder what the agenda actually is.......I still say the verdict is out that the earth is going to melt in 50 years

Global warming is just a euphemism for climate change. It is predicted that some parts of the world will actually become colder in 50 years.

Whose agenda are you referring to? The author, or global warming activists?

You're making assumptions here, regarding the author's lack of a conclusion concerning global warming. He was merely reporting on climate models based on the findings of one group of scientists. That's all. It doesn't seem to have been his intent to educate anyone on the subject. For that reason I don't know that this particular article is the best example to make a case for the position that climate change is not affecting the world. (I'm referring back to your thread title Global Warming = Bullshit?) Actually, that one sentence -- "This is in marked contrast to the northern tip of the Antarctic Peninsula that is one of the most rapidly warming parts of the Earth" alone, seems to illustrate the opposite.  

[JimmyTheFish]

Global warming is just a euphemism for climate change. It is predicted that some parts of the world will actually become colder in 50 years.

Whose agenda are you referring to? The author, or global warming activists?

You're making assumptions here, regarding the author's lack of a conclusion concerning global warming. He was merely reporting on climate models based on the findings of one group of scientists. That's all. It doesn't seem to have been his intent to educate anyone on the subject. For that reason I don't know that this particular article is the best example to make a case for the position that climate change is not affecting the world. (I'm referring back to your thread title Global Warming = Bullshit?) Actually, that one sentence -- "This is in marked contrast to the northern tip of the Antarctic Peninsula that is one of the most rapidly warming parts of the Earth" alone, seems to illustrate the opposite.  

Just as Global Warming is a euphemism for climate change, my comment of melting was strictly metaphorical

The agenda refers to the activists -- Agree Deedee, not the best article to prove anything either way, my point in posting and with a ? in title was to spark a discussion.

[BRUCE]

Just as Global Warming is a euphemism for climate change, my comment of melting was strictly metaphorical

The agenda refers to the activists -- Agree Deedee, not the best article to prove anything either way, my point in posting and with a ? in title was to spark a discussion.

She's attacked me before for having the gall to questing Left-Wing pieties such as Global Warming and Polar Bear numbers.  So long as we are debating this, and papers such as the one you have posted are written, the issue cannot be declared taboo.