Shows the weakness of your thinking that you have to rely on a Wall Street Journal commentator to present really stupid and incorrect analysis. Manhatten will be under water before the WSJ accepts that AGW is for real.
|
|
|
|
|
Shows the weakness of your thinking that you have to rely on a Wall Street Journal commentator to present really stupid and incorrect analysis. Manhatten will be under water before the WSJ accepts that AGW is for real.
"All roads lead to Putin" -- Thomas Jefferson
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OVw1PANUcdg
I hate Al Gore soooooo much.
Where's Altadawg?? Hurricane off the coast of africa headed our way.
I've been keeping an eye on this thread for just that reason.Originally Posted by TECH88
BTW - Isn't it funny that one of the longest running threads in this forum was started by someone talking about a Bill Nye interview? The only thread I could find that had a bigger response was started about boobies.
Isnt' there some irony in there some where?
Why wasn't Manhattan under water during earlier warming periods?
I suggest you learn something about Archimedes Principle!
You mean, other *recent* warming periods? Sea levels go up another 20 feet and you will see Manhatten under water.
"All roads lead to Putin" -- Thomas Jefferson
There is no evidence man-made CO2 causes climate change
Tech Track - Dr Kelvin Kemm
Published: 4 Jul 08 - 0:00
http://www.engineeringnews.co.za/page.php?rep_id=175
During 2008, have we seen many stories in the newspapers about 2007 being particularly warm as a result of global warming?
During 2006, the doomsters were predicting that 2007 would be the hottest year on record, so why have we seen no reports about this?
The answer is simple – 2007 turned out to be the coolest year for 30 years. It is also the case that there has been no global warming since 1998. In fact, since 1998, there has been steady cooling.
Even more dramatic is the fact that the most recent computer model predictions indicate that there will be no more global warming for the next ten years. But the doomsters say that, after this ten-year period, global warming will come back with a vengeance. Why?
Certainly, mankind's production of carbon dioxide (CO2) has continued to increase since 1998 and will continue to increase, particularly since countries such as China and India say that their economic growth comes first, so they do not intend worrying too much about CO2 production.
I have repeatedly pointed out that there is little or no link between CO2 production by mankind and a rise in global temperature. In fact, indications are that it is the opposite – an increased temperature causes more CO2 to be ejected into the atmosphere.
Pennsylvania passes Global warming legislation.
http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/jul2...-07-03-093.asp
Pennsylvania Assembly Passes First Global Warming Law
HARRISBURG, Pennsylvania, July 3, 2008 (ENS) - Global warming legislation will be enacted for the first time in Pennsylvania when Governor Ed Rendell signs the Pennsylvania Climate Change Act as he is expected to do. The measure was overwhelmingly approved today by both houses of the Pennsylvania General Assembly.
A coal-rich state, Pennsylvania emits one percent of the world’s greenhouse gases responsible for global warming, more than the emissions of 105 developing countries combined.
While Pennsylvania is a big contributor to global warming, the legislation passed today creates opportunities for the state to be part of the solution.
The measure will require Pennsylvania to conduct an inventory of greenhouse gas emissions and set up a registry for business and industry where they can track their emissions and get credit for pollution reductions.
The bill provides for an stakeholder advisory group for the state Department of Environmental Protection and requires the DEP to develop a state plan to reduce emissions.
"This will be a good planning tool for Pennsylvania to help with coordination of the various measures the state has implemented and those it should implement to combat climate change in the future," said state Representative Greg Vitali, a Democrat from Delaware County who introduced the measure in the House.
"All roads lead to Putin" -- Thomas Jefferson
Will it go to zero like the recent article said? Nope.
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosph...rrent.area.jpg
Southern Hemisphere Sea Ice has gone up!!!!1! Global Cooling! Evrybody put onj a jacket!
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosph...area.south.jpg
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/weathe...ing/index.html
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/sto...5265092&page=1
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25419299/
any mention of increasing ice in the Southern Hemisphere? Nope.
NASA Sees Arctic Ocean Circulation Do an About-Face
November 13, 2007
http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.cfm?release=2007-131
PASADENA, Calif. – A team of NASA and university scientists has detected an ongoing reversal in Arctic Ocean circulation triggered by atmospheric circulation changes that vary on decade-long time scales. The results suggest not all the large changes seen in Arctic climate in recent years are a result of long-term trends associated with global warming.
The team, led by James Morison of the University of Washington's Polar Science Center Applied Physics Laboratory, Seattle, used data from an Earth-observing satellite and from deep-sea pressure gauges to monitor Arctic Ocean circulation from 2002 to 2006.
Reporting in Geophysical Research Letters, the authors attribute the reversal to a weakened Arctic Oscillation, a major atmospheric circulation pattern in the northern hemisphere. The weakening reduced the salinity of the upper ocean near the North Pole, decreasing its weight and changing its circulation.
"Our study confirms many changes seen in upper Arctic Ocean circulation in the 1990s were mostly decadal in nature, rather than trends caused by global warming," said Morison.
NASA's explanation for last year's melt. Did you see his in the MSM?
NASA Examines Arctic Sea Ice Changes Leading to Record Low in 2007
10.01.07
http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/loo...-20071001.html
PASADENA, Calif. - A new NASA-led study found a 23-percent loss in the extent of the Arctic's thick, year-round sea ice cover during the past two winters. This drastic reduction of perennial winter sea ice is the primary cause of this summer's fastest-ever sea ice retreat on record and subsequent smallest-ever extent of total Arctic coverage.
Nghiem said the rapid decline in winter perennial ice the past two years was caused by unusual winds. "Unusual atmospheric conditions set up wind patterns that compressed the sea ice, loaded it into the Transpolar Drift Stream and then sped its flow out of the Arctic," he said. When that sea ice reached lower latitudes, it rapidly melted in the warmer waters.
IPCC Estimates of Sea Level Rise are Unreliable.
Most of the drastic statements about sea level rise (such as those from the admittedly un-scientific Salty) are formulated in terms of Global Average Sea Level. There is no such thing. Any numbers purporting to be such are simply garbage that has no meaning. LOCAL relative sea level change is all that matters for coastal planning. The LOCAL relative change is extremely variable worldwide and depends far more on local tectonic uplift or subsidence than on melting ice or freezing water. There simply is no global average for these parameters.
For instance, the Maldives, allegedly the most endangered group of low lying islands, would already have disappeared according to Al Gore and James Hansen. ------- You do remember James Hansen, the foot in mouth NASA guy who has publicly gone on record as saying “it’s OK to doctor the data if you want to make a strong case.”
Contrary to IPCC predictions, both satellite altimetry and tide gauge records have shown no sea level rise in the Maldives. In fact, the real data shows that the Local relative sea level there has FALLEN by 30 cm in the last 30 years.
It’s interesting that each successive IPCC report significantly reduces the rate of sea level rise it is “predicting”. Reverend Al took his famous “20 foot” number from the first report. BTW it was stated as equivalent to 20 ft. per century. That has come down steadily in the succeeding reports and in the latest one it is now projected by the IPCC as about 18 CENTIMETERS per century. Some IPCCers have said they pretty much had to do this as the situation in the Maldives was clearly making the previous “estimates” look bad.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
