global warming … it's REAL

It's essentially impossible to provide the data that "skeptics" would like to see, whether or not global warming is real. If you don't want accept any given scientific truth, you'll always be able to find ways to avoid it.

In every scientific field it's possible to cherry pick evidence here and there to support your pet theory. A 95% confidence interval in your study means that 1 in 20 studies will be a false positive. If there are thousands of studies, there will be hundreds of false data points to choose from. Factor in publication bias and the true/untrue split gets even worse.

The preponderance of the evidence suggests it's real, and is pretty consistent with our models and that's what counts. Whether or not we're causing it, it's happening.

Downside risk of getting off of carbon is the delta between using dinosaur parts and using expensive green energy over the period where it catches up to hydrocarbons on a cost basis.

Downside risk of staying the course is the collapse of our food supply and attendant massive geopolitical instability. Or worse.

Maybe I'm just overly risk averse, but I'll take my chances with green power.

ppddppdd wrote: The preponderance of the evidence suggests it's real, and is pretty consistent with our models and that's what counts. Whether or not we're causing it, it's happening.

I think the evidence that human activity is responsible for most of the warming is rock solid at this point. If I could somehow bet all of my money (and my cars...that's where most of my money is ) on that, I'd do it.

GameboyRMH wrote:

ppddppdd wrote: The preponderance of the evidence suggests it's real, and is pretty consistent with our models and that's what counts. Whether or not we're causing it, it's happening.

I think the evidence that human activity is responsible for most of the warming is rock solid at this point. If I could somehow bet all of my money (and my cars...that's where most of my money is ) on that, I'd do it.

And that big bright orange thing in the sky has absolutely nothing to do with global warming trends either.

In reply to Bobzilla:

Nor the fact we are coming out of a reasonably recent ice age......the graph cone junky hotlinked showed that the earth spikes in temperature, then gradually cools off over millenia.

To think that our petty existance can trump mother nature in production of CO2 and particulate matter is laughable at best.

For reference, dry ice is formed at -109.3 deg F.

Then there's the Arctic. http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2013/20131212_arcticreportcard.html

So the Arctic is warming but the Antarctic is getting colder. Even NOAA doesn't have a really good explanation of this, they blame it on ice melting quicker in the sun. Not sure I buy that, ice is equally reflective no matter where it is positioned. I personally think it's because the Arctic has much smaller land masses, ocean water can carry heat under the ice pack and that causes the melt/freeze cycles.

Regardless, yes the temperature IS changing. The questions are why and how far will it go? There's no one answer to 'why', the Mount Pinatubo cooling in the 1990's is one example of this, even earlier is Krakatoa. How far will it go? Can't tell. Nature's checks and balances will keep things reasonably balanced- unless something weird happens like another Krakatoa. Or even worse if the Yellowstone volcano decides to wake up. http://www.nps.gov/yell/naturescience/caldera.htm

If that happens we will look fondly back at this period when it was nice and warm outside.

"Petty existence" ORLy?

That bright orange thing in the sky has been there for 4.5 billion years. It is responsible for our climate change, but that's because we've depleted the ozone, allowing it to warm us up a bit more than naturally.

yamaha wrote: In reply to bravenrace: I just see us as being an expendable species upon this planet......we always have been. The fools are the ones proclaiming to have mastered our enviroment.

Yep. Eventually Nature will purge humanity. The sooner the better. I'm tired.

In reply to Cone_Junkie:

In reply to Cone_Junkie:

I'll see your ignorance of thinking too greatly of ourselves, and show you something even worse than what we can do.

Seriously, this is meerly 3 pictures from this year.......and they're happening all the time, every day. Click this link, as it covers only this week. http://volcano.si.edu/reports_weekly.cfm

On that note, we need legislation to put nature on notice that we shall no longer tolerate its complete disregard for our well being as well as its own......Henceforth, vocanic eruptions, wildfires, methane gas discharges, etc are explicitly banned and are punishable by nuclear war.

In reply to yamaha:

These natural occurrences have been happening for millions of years, yet the CO graph shows a MASSIVE spike in the last 100 years. I'm sure it's just a coincidence...

The propaganda machine has worked very well to mitigate the PUBLIC'S opinion on global climate change. Yet again, 97% of SCIENTISTS that publish on the matter agree it's happening.

I'll let Joe six pack keep his opinion based on his favorite TV network, I'll follow the scientific community. I'm weird like that.

Can you be any more condescending?

In reply to Cone_Junkie:

Indeed they have, they also go in cycles of dormant/active.....I would be very interested to see studies of eruptions side by side with the climate chart.

I wonder if we were also responsible for the high global temps that the dinosaurs experienced?

Bobzilla wrote: Can you be any more condescending?

You are easily offended bob. Which is strange because you post THE most condescending remarks on this board, hands down. Just like the stupid dinosaur remark above.

You might just want to stay out of these discussions or put your big boy pants on.

yamaha- they may correlate with the (much) smaller spikes that you see over the last 800,000 years. How can that massive spike in the last 100 years be explained away?

Cone_Junkie wrote:

Bobzilla wrote: Can you be any more condescending?

You are easily offended bob. Which is strange because you post THE most condescending remarks on this board, hands down. Just like the stupid dinosaur remark above. You might just want to stay out of these discussions or put your big boy pants on. yamaha- they may correlate with the (much) smaller spikes that you see over the last 800,000 years. How can that massive spike in the last 100 years be explained away?

I think if you decide to look back over the last few months, you've spent most of your time explaining to everyone how much better you are than everyone else. I've watched it happen over and over lately.

Maybe YOU should step back and take a breath. MAybe find something fun to do. Go out and enjoy life rather than argue on the internets.

stuart in mn wrote: Remember that weather and climate are two separate things. Posting about global warming any time there's a winter storm is getting pretty old.

sorry …we don't have a sarcasm emoticon … I made the assumption that most of the regulars on here would know me well enough (if only by my postings) to realize that my use of the term global warming was said in sarcasm

In reply to Cone_Junkie:

That graph's scale is in what units of measurement? Oh, thousands of years........

bravenrace wrote: In reply to Cone_Junkie:

ZOMG I'm so offended by this condescending cartoon. Oh the humanity. LOCK THE THREAD! BAN THE USER!

Bobzilla said: And that big bright orange thing in the sky has absolutely nothing to do with global warming trends either.

On no you didn't! I can't handle this! Make it stop! My poor little ego! SHUT DOWN THE INTERNETZ!

And there it is. The meltdown.

Yea......I have bigger fish to fry, mainly for dinner.

What kind? I have a couple lobster tails defrosting for the grill.

In reply to Enyar:

I haven't decided yet, since I am a peasant, most likely cod.

Cone_Junkie wrote: These natural occurrences have been happening for millions of years, yet the CO graph shows a MASSIVE spike in the last 100 years. I'm sure it's just a coincidence... The propaganda machine has worked very well to mitigate the PUBLIC'S opinion on global climate change. Yet again, 97% of SCIENTISTS that publish on the matter agree it's happening. I'll let Joe six pack keep his opinion based on his favorite TV network, I'll follow the scientific community. I'm weird like that.

Science! What do they know... when have they ever been right about anything? I mean... command of electricity, the cure for polio, the remote control, microprocessors and sex toys you can control over IP networks for anonymous anal probing were all just flukes. This weather business is the end of credibility for their little cult.

Giant Purple Snorklewacker wrote: Science! What do they know... when have they ever been right about anything? I mean... command of electricity, the cure for polio, the remote control, microprocessors and sex toys you can control over IP networks for anonymous anal probing were all just flukes. This weather business is the end of credibility for their little cult.

Tell me more about this IP networks you talk about...

I hope global warming is real. Really. I've never liked the beach, I live in western Canada where its wastefully cold half the year, and we've got an entire arctic we could use if only it would warm up a bit. berkeley polar bears and New Orleans, I say.