toldailytopic: Do you believe mankind is causing global warming?

[YahuShuan]

I think when Al Gore showed us his hockey stick that somebody ought to have picked up a real one and shown him what it can do to a hack like him. He needs to sit in front of the goal and let me lift a few. And the rest of the tree huggers can join him. At least together they might make a save. Or stop talking at least long enough to put their teeth back in their mouths. Exsqueeze me, but I've had enough of a veritable kingdoom of duffusses trying to get me to believe that anyone but GOD HIMSELF will be able to destroy what HE has made! And I am tired of them subverting the Command from the CREATOR to US telling us to make it SUBMIT to US ... NOT us to it. Sheesh, how dumb is one to think that they can destroy what God has made? Hmmmmn, they would have to be thinking that they are more powerful than Yah.

Talk about needing an attitude adjustment, like woof.

 

[The Barbarian]

So your answer is that Australia used to be a few thousand kilometers to the south whereas my answer is that it was a few kilometers higher.

The difference is, there is evidence for my conclusion, and your assumption is based on a faulty reading of the Bible.

Interesting.

That's not the word I was thinking of.

And also note that we are not talking about Australia in isolation. We are talking about an ice age that affected every continent.

Both. There were only two continents back then.

 

[genuineoriginal]

Just found this in a scientific journal:

Data for global surface temperature indicate little warming between 1998 and 2008 (1). Furthermore, global surface temperature declines 0.2 °C between 2005 and 2008. Although temperature increases in 2009 and 2010, the lack of a clear increase in global surface temperature between 1998 and 2008 (1), combined with rising concentrations of atmospheric CO2 and other greenhouse gases, prompts some popular commentators (2, 3) to doubt the existing understanding of the relationship among radiative forcing, internal variability, and global surface temperature. This seeming disconnect may be one reason why the public is increasingly sceptical about anthropogenic climate change (4).
Reconciling anthropogenic climate change with observed temperature 1998–2008
Robert K. Kaufmanna,1, Heikki Kauppib, Michael L. Manna, and James H. Stockc
PNAS July 19, 2011 vol. 108 no. 29 11790-11793 ​

The article starts with the assumption that rising CO2 levels should cause a rise in global surface temperature, then looks for an explanation for why it did not happen between 1998 and 2008.

The rest of the article goes on to say that Global Warming has been stopped by the burning of fossil fuels, mainly in China.

It seems that the Chinese coal plants do not have the fancy scrubbers used in American coal plants that remove the sulfur from the flue gas. Chinese coal plants have put enough sulfur into the atmosphere to counteract the effect of any rise in CO2 from the rest of the world.

 

[some other dude]

Just found this in a scientific journal:

Data for global surface temperature indicate little warming between 1998 and 2008 (1). Furthermore, global surface temperature declines 0.2 °C between 2005 and 2008. Although temperature increases in 2009 and 2010, the lack of a clear increase in global surface temperature between 1998 and 2008 (1), combined with rising concentrations of atmospheric CO2 and other greenhouse gases, prompts some popular commentators (2, 3) to doubt the existing understanding of the relationship among radiative forcing, internal variability, and global surface temperature. This seeming disconnect may be one reason why the public is increasingly sceptical about anthropogenic climate change (4).
Reconciling anthropogenic climate change with observed temperature 1998–2008
Robert K. Kaufmanna,1, Heikki Kauppib, Michael L. Manna, and James H. Stockc
PNAS July 19, 2011 vol. 108 no. 29 11790-11793 ​

The article starts with the assumption that rising CO2 levels should cause a rise in global surface temperature, then looks for an explanation for why it did not happen between 1998 and 2008.

The rest of the article goes on to say that Global Warming has been stopped by the burning of fossil fuels, mainly in China.

It seems that the Chinese coal plants do not have the fancy scrubbers used in American coal plants that remove the sulfur from the flue gas. Chinese coal plants have put enough sulfur into the atmosphere to counteract the effect of any rise in CO2 from the rest of the world.

This is a perfect example of why I am skeptical of anybody who claims to understand a system as complex as the global atmosphere.

 

[genuineoriginal]

This is a perfect example of why I am skeptical of anybody who claims to understand a system as complex as the global atmosphere.

It just proves that their computer models were incomplete.

 

[The Barbarian]

Data for global surface temperature indicate little warming between 1998 and 2008 (1).

Well, that's a testable claim. Let's take a look. But first a little background:
It would seem 1998 is an odd place to start, and 2008 an odd place to end. That's because your source is doing a little cherry-picking. You see, they started with an anomalously warm year, and ended with an anomalously cold one.
From the GISS data at NASA:

• 1998 56
• 1999 32
• 2000 33
• 2001 47
• 2002 56
• 2003 55
• 2004 48
• 2005 63
• 2006 55
• 2007 58
• 2008 44

Now let's do the analysis and see the best fit for the actual trend:
11 data points
Slope of the line: 1.21818 (strong positive trend, showing increasing temps)

And that's with cherry-picking. Try any other set of 11 years, and it will be an even stronger trend line.

Although temperature increases in 2009 and 2010, the lack of a clear increase in global surface temperature between 1998 and 2008 (1),

But there's a strong trend upward as anyone can see, even with the cherry-picked data. If you need more evidence, do a scatter plot with the year on the X axis and the temp anomaly on the Y axis. Then draw straight line that fits the slope of the points best. You'll see it rises with time.

It seems that the Chinese coal plants do not have the fancy scrubbers used in American coal plants that remove the sulfur from the flue gas. Chinese coal plants have put enough sulfur into the atmosphere to counteract the effect of any rise in CO2 from the rest of the world.

Turns out they helped a bit. But the rise in CO2 swamped the effect from Chinese coal burning. Last year was a record year for hot. And this one is trending that way again.

 

[The Barbarian]

It just proves that their computer models were incomplete.

All scientific models are incomplete. If they weren't they'd be reality. However, James Hanson's ten year prediction, based on the model, was surprisingly accurate. Given that it includes things like sulfur dioxide from volcanic eruptions, El Nino/La Nina events and so on, it's complex and multifactored, but still very accurate.

Which is why scientists have so much confidence in it.

 

[some other dude]

It just proves that their computer models were incomplete.

At this point in our understanding, I have no confidence that they can be complete.

But then you have koolaid guzzlers like Barbie who think it can be simplified to two variables. :doh:

 

[genuineoriginal]

Well, that's a testable claim. Let's take a look. But first a little background:
It would seem 1998 is an odd place to start, and 2008 an odd place to end. That's because your source is doing a little cherry-picking. You see, they started with an anomalously warm year, and ended with an anomalously cold one.
From the GISS data at NASA:

• 1998 56
• 1999 32
• 2000 33
• 2001 47
• 2002 56
• 2003 55
• 2004 48
• 2005 63
• 2006 55
• 2007 58
• 2008 44

Now let's do the analysis and see the best fit for the actual trend:
11 data points
Slope of the line: 1.21818 (strong positive trend, showing increasing temps)

And that's with cherry-picking. Try any other set of 11 years, and it will be an even stronger trend line.



But there's a strong trend upward as anyone can see, even with the cherry-picked data. If you need more evidence, do a scatter plot with the year on the X axis and the temp anomaly on the Y axis. Then draw straight line that fits the slope of the points best. You'll see it rises with time.

It is nice to see you arguing against the Global Warming supporters. :rotfl:
All of us Global Warming deniers think the figures coming out of the climate research centers are bogus, too.
Here is the reference for where the data on the global surface temperatures used in the article came from:

1.↵Jones P-D, Osborn T-J, Briffa K-R(2009) Global monthly and annual temperature anomalies (degrees C), 1850–2008 (Relative to the 1961–1990 mean) (Hadley Center for Climate Prediction and Research-University of East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom).​

Turns out they helped a bit. But the rise in CO2 swamped the effect from Chinese coal burning. Last year was a record year for hot. And this one is trending that way again.

So, the solution is to remove the scrubbers from American coal plants and get them cranking out a bunch more kWh.
We can get cheaper electricity and fix the climate at the same time. It is a win-win.
:jump:

 

[1PeaceMaker]

I do not believe man holds a candle compared to the sun.

 

[The Barbarian]

It is nice to see you arguing against the Global Warming supporters.

I just go with the data.

All of us Global Warming deniers think the figures coming out of the climate research centers are bogus, too.

That's a very foolish mistake. The GISS data, for example, is very well-established. Your guys use it.

I'm not as familiar with the HadCRUT3 data, but I'll take a look.

Regarding coal plant emissions:
Turns out they helped a bit. But the rise in CO2 swamped the effect from Chinese coal burning. Last year was a record year for hot. And this one is trending that way again.

So, the solution is to remove the scrubbers from American coal plants and get them cranking out a bunch more kWh.

If only. But if the massive Chinese pollution (which kills thousands of people with respiratory problems annually) won't do it, I don't think ours will, either. And the human cost seems excessive.

It is a win-win.

Unless it kills you, of course.

 

[eameece]

:darwinsm: Quite possibly one of the more witless statements I have read over the years.

:rotfl:

Because you have no wits, and refuse to see what is happening.
:readthis:
The scientists say global warming is happening, because we use fossil fuels. We can convert to alternative energy, and the government needs to act to push this. Republicans today refuse to act to change this. You guys put these idiots into office. YOU are responsbile. Get some wits aboutcha, and change your vote.

 

[eameece]

He's like a trained dog, isn't he?

An obsessive trained dog.

Better than a trained dinosaur. And dinosaurs are extinct. Except at Jurassic Park! It's frightening in the dark! :rotfl:

 

[eameece]

The atheist agenda is to apply as much camouflage to the truth as possible.

The believer's agenda is to look away from the truth and hide in a book.
:mmph:

 

[genuineoriginal]

That's a very foolish mistake. The GISS data, for example, is very well-established. Your guys use it.

I think that it is likely that the data coming out of NASA will tend to be better than the figures coming out of the climate research unit. NASA's existence is not dependent on promoting the idea of anthropogenic climate change, so is less likely to be biased.

 

[The Barbarian]

I don't see a lot of difference in the various data sets. Even though they are gathered by different methods, they all seem to be pretty close.

 

[Stripe]

There were only two continents back then.

The question is, Barbarian, how does one accumulate ice on areas that are not at the poles. While you assume Australia was near the South Pole, how do you account for ice accumulation away from the poles. Or do you think that ice can only accumulate at the poles?

 

[zoo22]

Exsqueeze me, but I've had enough of a veritable kingdoom of duffusses trying to get me to believe that anyone but GOD HIMSELF will be able to destroy what HE has made! And I am tired of them subverting the Command from the CREATOR to US telling us to make it SUBMIT to US ... NOT us to it. Sheesh, how dumb is one to think that they can destroy what God has made? Hmmmmn, they would have to be thinking that they are more powerful than Yah.

Talk about needing an attitude adjustment, like woof.

This is a ridiculous "argument" to make against man-made global warming. Of course we can and often do destroy God's creations.

 

[YahuShuan]

This is a ridiculous "argument" to make against man-made global warming. Of course we can and often do destroy God's creations.

No, we don't. Man attempts, but man can not. They can "pollute" the earth, but they can not destroy it. Reason being is that Yah said HE would do that. Do you think man can take that away from Him? It is Yah who will roll back the skies. If you think you can do it...go for it, I wanna see how that works for ya. Saying that is like saying you got more power than He does so you can take what He said and do it yourself??? Thinking that way, how do you expect to be resurrected eh? If He can do that to you, He can do that to anything He wants. He can let it be destroyed or stop it from being destroyed, and even when you think it has been destroyed, Yahuweh can rebuild it and thereby it can never be destroyed. If it could be and I were you, I think I would be really worried about what you are thinking. I mean really think about what are you saying? You don't believe in resurrection? If He can't resurrect a bird, how can you believe He can resurrect you?

Helloooooooooooooooo? Is that not what the anti-Christ will do??? Trying to take the place of Yahuweh and get you to believe he can????????????????????????????????
YES it is. Might wanna check your "spirit" in you that is in conflict with the Words of Yahuweh. I hope Yah blesses you with an insight on this.

 

[Frank Ernest]

Because you have no wits, and refuse to see what is happening.
:readthis:
The scientists say global warming is happening, because we use fossil fuels. We can convert to alternative energy, and the government needs to act to push this. Republicans today refuse to act to change this. You guys put these idiots into office. YOU are responsbile. Get some wits aboutcha, and change your vote.

:darwinsm: :nananana: