Coldest winter in 20 years in the US so much for global warming

[Lockedin]

Originally Posted by Fondueset

I can't get over the simplistic attitude that generated this thread. As if global warming means the weather gets warmer everywhere! Not everyones a meteorologist I guess.

Sorry, not a rocket scientist, flight control team member, only a Navy trained meteorologist, and a concerned participant in my local (polluted) environment.

Guess you missed the point, Sir. I was not referring to the weather (or the larger issues associated with it). Instead of looking up, I meant to look down, around your feet particularly.

I hope you are able to dive on clean beaches in clean waters, in a clean part of the world (although I doubt it). Or, perhaps you, like me, surf, dive, kayak, sail, and obtain food from waters steeped in other people's effluent and trash. Unless you compost your toilet (as another on these forums suggests), someone, perhaps you, swims in your poop.

Yes, global warming is a large issue (whichever side of it you are on). I was simply attempting to encourage you (and myself), to take responsibility for your particular area, in a physical, "get off your bum" sense. Yes, get a "green" home, yes, drive a "green" car, or better yet, walk or ride your bike. But, don't forget your trash.

The point of the post was to take responsibility for the area in which you get in the water. Responsibility meaning pick up one aluminum can that somebody else didn't, how about the cigarette butt or juice box that you've passed by on your last three dives? Pick it up, it won't hurt! Bragging aside, I bring a small canvas (not plastic) sack when I go to check the conditions, so that I can trash the single flip-flop, aluminum can, diaper, etc. that I have no shortage of on my local beach.

It is simplistic. And it works. Surfrider Foundation stages regional beach cleanups where an entire county of water enthusiasts show up, clean up, and educate non-beach enthusiasts about why they should at least find a trash can for their cr@p. At the end of the day, the beach is noticeably better, sometimes pristine (for about 12 hours, until the next tourist shows up). Every piece of trash that I've picked up has demonstrated, to every tourist and local that witnessed the act, that my beach is important, and I will at least do a small bit to protect it. I would not want to speak for others, but I, for one, am tired of beach closures, sinus and staph infections from my local waters, and high mercury levels in my local fishery.

What grade does your diving area get? Do you even know? Is there at least one actual scientist sampling water and beach material in your area? Are you helping them? Simple stuff. Collect a vial of water, beach sand, or both; and send it away. Very simplistic, effective things...

As hip and highminded as the politics and arguments of global warming sound, they are all B.S. if you aren't backing it with local, personal action.

Simplistic. True.

Sorry if this post sounds harsh, it's just a "hot button" of mine, it boils down to talk vs. walk. I don't remember which enviro-group says it but: Think globally. Act locally.

[ocean_314]

Junk science is when a theory is considered a fact discounting all other theories. Science fact is something that is proven once by those putting out the theory and then that proof is duplicated by other scientists.
The CO2 theory is just that a theory. Other theories that have a lot more proof and facts behind them are:
1. the sun is going through a cycle of higher energy output. This is backed by the fact that all the planets in our solar system are warming at the same time and same rate relative to their distance from the sun. The sun historically has gone through warming and cooling cycles.
2. Most of the temperatures that where taken since temperatures have been recorded world wide or in the developed countries i should say, are taken at airports. As the airports expand more pavement is laid down and more heat is absorbed by that pavement. Because of this heat absorption the temperature around the airport has risen, but not the temperature in the suround countryside. So that the warming of the earth is not a severe as the CO2 theorists are saying.
There are many very credible scientist that do not have a finical interest in global warming that are behind these two theories. Yet the press loves a liberal so Gore is the authority on global warming. kinda of sad isn't it. Oh and Gore has soaked the global warming for about 100 million dollars into his own pockets. Yup a man to be believed and trusted.

[bdurrett]

Originally Posted by ocean_314

Junk science is when a theory is considered a fact discounting all other theories. Science fact is something that is proven once by those putting out the theory and then that proof is duplicated by other scientists.
The CO2 theory is just that a theory. Other theories that have a lot more proof and facts behind them are:
1. the sun is going through a cycle of higher energy output. This is backed by the fact that all the planets in our solar system are warming at the same time and same rate relative to their distance from the sun. The sun historically has gone through warming and cooling cycles.

Sorry but this solar cycle is not a "real" factor (less than 0.08%) as cited by the Stanford Study as well as the data derived from the SORCE spacecraft. While Tung and Camp's article in Journal of Geophysical Research, Volume 113, Issue D5, CiteID D05114 suggests that the solar cycle does have an effect, it is insufficient to explain the magnitude and speed of the current rise in measured temperatures across the globe.

In addition, I would REALLY like to know where your information that all the planets are warming came from. I have engineers working on the Flight Control teams for both Mars Express and Venus Express at ESA. The scientific data that we are providing to the scientific community does NOT support your statement at all. Venus, with the run-away greenhouse effect, is already about as hot as it has been but there has been no appreciable (read "measurable") statistically significant change in the temperature of the atmosphere. Mars has not shown ANY appreciable warming in data provided by either Mars Express or the Mars Rovers.

Originally Posted by ocean_314

2. Most of the temperatures that where taken since temperatures have been recorded world wide or in the developed countries i should say, are taken at airports. As the airports expand more pavement is laid down and more heat is absorbed by that pavement. Because of this heat absorption the temperature around the airport has risen, but not the temperature in the suround countryside. So that the warming of the earth is not a severe as the CO2 theorists are saying.

Again, I have to take issue with this "fact." Most of the temperatures that we, the public, consume are, indeed taken at airports or other "paved over areas." However, in order to acquire a global picture, a wider range of sensor platforms is used, including data from oil bore platforms, naval vessels of all the "ocean-going" countries, in-situ measurements from polar exploration stations (hardly a candiidate for the "paved over heating" theory), and satellites such as the European MSG system or NOAA-19, JASON, The European Polar System, etc. This array of sensors has also registered an increase that is well outside of the potential 0.08% as determined could be attributed to the "Solar Cycle."

Originally Posted by ocean_314

There are many very credible scientist that do not have a finical interest in global warming that are behind these two theories. Yet the press loves a liberal so Gore is the authority on global warming. kinda of sad isn't it. Oh and Gore has soaked the global warming for about 100 million dollars into his own pockets. Yup a man to be believed and trusted.

Let's leave political agendas out of the discussion and focus on what we KNOW instead of what we ass-u-me. Gore and Moore are one extreme, there are plenty of people on the other side as well.

[Stuart]

Ocean 314, firstly I think that you should re-read the whole of this thread. Secondly I would very much like you to explain why you feel this is junk science. It would be illuminating for us all.

[ocean_314]

Stuart, while i am all for cleaning up this planet and stopping deforestation and the pollution of the oceans, no one knows for a fact why our planet is warming.
We simply do not have the knowledge to understand planetary weather and all the different influences on it.
Junk science is when something is called fact and it is not. Simple.
I misspoke but i have steelhead to catch and softball to coach so i ask for forgiveness, the solar influence includes such things as planetary wobble and things beyond human influence.
The way temperatures where recorded over time was at airports the recording of temperatures at oil wells and other sites is a relatively recent affair. A beautifully done study was put forth by the unofficial Oregon state meteorologist (he is on contract with the state for many years not a employee) which showed in great detail just how temperatures where recorded over recent history and how the increase in pavement affected these recordings. If i can Google his work i will post it.
Before we bring the world ecomony to a grinding halt lets get all the facts in order and make some informed decisions. Yes the artic ice is melting. why? Last i heard we will know in about 10 years. The real science is being done know.

[Fondueset]

Locked in - I wasn't addressing any point you'd made but was referring to the original post.

'Junk Science' is a political term. Its definition is a matter of political convenience. I have never read a paper on global warming or climate change or whatever that excluded anything. I have never seen a serious scientific paper on this, or any, subject that claimed 100% certitude without having seen the realization of its hypothesis. All theories are theories until whatever they hope to predict actually occurs. At that point the theory, within its scope, is proven.

Special interests have exploited the theoretical nature of all responsible science to insert 'OJ's Glove' type doubts in order to avoid legislation and public opinion that may not favor those interests.

The initial arguments were an outright denial that any change in the earth's climate was taking place at all. These arguments became increasingly untenable as more evidence to the contrary was compiled and brought before the public. Once discredited tactics were shifted to deny the role of industrial emissions in the phenomenon. (remember the moronic television adds that showed a little girl blowing a dandelion and implied that those arguing in favor of controlling industrial emissions were opposed to breathing because it produces CO2!!) This is the 'oh well, theres nothing we can do so why not live it up?!' argument combined with focusing erroneously on one aspect of the problem with deliberate misunderstanding.

The best science can do is assert a good probability that these things play a role. Since those in opposition are primarily interested in their own financial welfare and political power their purposes are served merely by creating delays.

Intelligence dictates pro-active action based on state-of-the-art understanding. Yet intelligence is a function of intention. If the intention is to live responsibly in the natural world then one line of action suggests itself. If the intention is to protect corporate profits or maintain a grip on political power then other lines of action are called for and 'intelligence' takes another direction and meaning. The battle becomes one for public opinion - in this case those in power were successful in reversing the environmental consciousness of the 70s - which has been good for the automotive and fuel industries and their many many subsidiaries and easy to do because the arguments need only go along with people's lower nature. (and the real genius behind the anti-global warming camp is the consolidation of all pollution concerns into this single, ostensibly questionable, hypothesis ie; 'theres no proof pollution contributes climate change therefor: all attempts to control pollution can be questioned!' )

Now that the environmental and monetary consequences of this trend have become a matter of common experience they are still trying to slow the shift as much as possible.

The term 'Junk Science' is simply one of the semantic weapons in the arsenal of devices to influence public opinion.

Origins of the Terms 'Junk Science' and 'Sound Science'
About Junkscience.com

[chris the vis]

You people never here of the flying spaghetti monster? Check out this website definitely one of the best and most credible explanations behind global warming I've heard thus far...Open Letter To Kansas School Board at Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster

[Fondueset]

chris,

I AM the flying spaghetti monster. (you didn't hear it from me)

[chris the vis]

Hahaha! and here i thought it was another member of this forum, one that resides in Italy perhaps?

[Fondueset]

My minion..muhahahaha etc.

[land shark]

On a lighter note I was listening to a lecture on natural selection and fossil genes,
and the speaker made note that the ozone holes are on the mend. Seee we can affect some good change. Also clean coal technologies seem to be coming along. Remember all those nasty nox,s and such its getting better!

Lastly I have led a few river way cleanups years ago. Well for what it is worth I do see a reduction in the trash. I feel the young we have trained have grown up with some good values.

[kale]

That's why it's being called "climate change" now, lol. I wish global warming was factual, I wouldn't mind catching wsb and lobster up here.

[chris the vis]

AFP: Sarkozy hosts hostage families as Somali pirates await ransom
Pirates making a come back and temperatures in US dropping?coincidence...me thinks not!

[Fondueset]

Another consequence of the american addiction to junk food.

[T2K]

fat people cause global warming(more food requires more oil to produce it and transport it, fat people need suv's. fat people are sedentary so they use electronics for entertainments instead of exercising. they consume more medication which also requires lots of energy to produce.