Global Warming

[Rorschach]

LOL some people are funny...

lets say we forget about plants and human life.
lets say we only concentrate on climate and specifically global warming after all that is what the climate change believers really are on about.
lets say they are right and it's all about CO2.

what happens when we get rid of all the CO2? we freeze and or we fry...

where do you think the CO2 in the thermosphere comes from?

to deplete the CO2 in the atmosphere means you cut the level of protection the CO2 in the thermosphere provides for us.

the CO2 in the lower atmosphere along with other so called Greenhouse gasses provides us with a comfortable atmospheric envelope in which to live... some of the time remember water vapour is the gas which has the most profound effect of all the greenhouse gasses, it is also by far the most prolific.

Why some of the time? because we have a natural cycle where we have very long periods of cold... which we call ICE AGES..

Personally I doubt we will be ready to cope with the next one when it arrives and it is due.

[Super Nova]

While I am not providing this view below as evidence that we need to do something now I do buy into his feeling....

He added: “The continuing nightmare I have consists of moving from the ghastly sound of my own voice to the sound of a perpetual scientific experiment which only finally produces the evidence and proof once everything is gone and we have tested and monitored it all to destruction.”

I think he is on the money.......

[Now I wait for your backlash.......] Anyone who would marry Camilla has to have a screw loose.

Ignoring climate change turns world into 'dying patient', says Prince Charles

The Prince of Wales has launched an attack on businesses and sceptics who ignore climate change, in a clear message that more needs to be done to protect the environment.

Link to Bonny Prince Charles's opion

[Super Nova]

Personally I doubt we will be ready to cope with the next one when it arrives and it is due.

If these events occurred in the normal change timeframe, there will be time to adjust. If they are artificially accelerated and we for example, end up in a runaway greenhouse... we will not have the time.

[IQS.RLOW]

I do buy into his feeling....

You know what that feeling is SN?

Panic brought on by being gullible and ignorant.

[IQS.RLOW]

Roger Pielke Sr. was quoted in David Appell’s recent article Whither global warming? Has global warming slowed down? over at the Yale Forum on Climate Change & The Media. That portion of the article reads:

About 90 percent of this extra energy goes into the oceans. But meteorologist Roger Pielke Sr. of the University of Colorado in Boulder says he would like to understand why more heat is going into the deep ocean. “Until we understand how this fundamental shift in the climate system occurred,” says Pielke, “and if this change in vertical heat transfer really happened, and is not just due to the different areal coverage and data quality in the earlier years, we have a large gap in our understanding of the climate system.”

These large changes in ocean content reveal that the Earth’s surface is not a great place to look for a planetary energy imbalance. “This means this heat is not being sampled by the global average surface temperature trend,” he says. “Since that metric is being used as the icon to report to policymakers on climate change, it illustrates a defect in using the two-dimensional field of surface temperature to diagnose global warming.”

[Super Nova]

I do buy into his feeling....

You know what that feeling is SN?

Panic brought on by being gullible and ignorant.

You are funny.

[Super Nova]

Roger Pielke Sr. was quoted in David Appell’s recent article Whither global warming? Has global warming slowed down? over at the Yale Forum on Climate Change & The Media. That portion of the article reads:

About 90 percent of this extra energy goes into the oceans. But meteorologist Roger Pielke Sr. of the University of Colorado in Boulder says he would like to understand why more heat is going into the deep ocean. “Until we understand how this fundamental shift in the climate system occurred,” says Pielke, “and if this change in vertical heat transfer really happened, and is not just due to the different areal coverage and data quality in the earlier years, we have a large gap in our understanding of the climate system.”

These large changes in ocean content reveal that the Earth’s surface is not a great place to look for a planetary energy imbalance. “This means this heat is not being sampled by the global average surface temperature trend,” he says. “Since that metric is being used as the icon to report to policymakers on climate change, it illustrates a defect in using the two-dimensional field of surface temperature to diagnose global warming.”

Good extract. I note you don't provide the link.... naughty you.

We don't understand much about this however it would be a terrible shame if the effect was to change the water circulation so the warm water stops circulating leading to an ice age in the northern hemisphere. Then we would have a major impact even though the average energy is higher. So it's not just about the world getting warmer, it more about the effect of the increased energy in the system. Also this extra energy could release methane which is 10 times more a greenhouse gas and we have a run away train.

I'm not ignorant, I take a risk based approach to my assessment.

If you had a 50/50 chance dying before the end of the year if you did nothing but could do something to stop it, you would. Why would you take a "do nothing" approach. If you spend $100 a year on medical treatment now but needed to spend $5,000 to save your life, would you spend it.

[IQS.RLOW]

I have already pointed out the cost/ benefit of carbon reduction which you again chose to ignore for motherhood statements.

The cost of your action will kill more people than global warming ever will.

[Super Nova]

I have already pointed out the cost/ benefit of carbon reduction which you again chose to ignore for motherhood statements.

You have pointed this out. This was based on the current approach which is to have carbon taxes and spend big on current green energy.

I don't think this is the right way to go. There has to be other longer term things we can do to redress this.

We should reduce emission, how can this be incentivised without the taxes.
We should extract carbon, how can this be done cheaply. We could start by stopping deforestation and plant some tree or other organic mechanisms to extract it.

The cost of your action will kill more people than global warming ever will.

That I don't buy into. That is fear mongering to the uninformed masses.

[annielaurie]

We should reduce emission, how can this be incentivised without the taxes.
We should extract carbon, how can this be done cheaply. We could start by stopping deforestation and plant some tree or other organic mechanisms to extract it.

The cost of your action will kill more people than global warming ever will.

That I don't buy into. That is fear mongering to the uninformed masses.

I have to agree with what IQ says here ^^^