Dan Robinson
From the IPCC report said:
All your rain-free base are belong to us. You have no chance to see tornado make your time.
Global Warming
- Thread starter Andrew Stoller
- Start date
All your rain-free base are belong to us. You have no chance to see tornado make your time.
Bart_Comstock
EF5
Some how I think the government had a bigger role in the conclusion of this article than anything else as Bush is trying to apease the enviromentalist and claimed that he was going to do something about america's role in global warming int the state of the union speech. Also one of the #1 things that will be an issue that is laid out on the table for next years election will be global warming. Large amount of the public feel like it is responcible for everything from sunrise to why yesterday wasnt as windy as today, nowthose in power who want to keep their seats and those hopefulls will beable to add even more people to those wo think it is all global warmiongs fault and will be able to feed off that as they try to pull votes their way. I am not saying that the report is total rubbish, but I do have a feeling that it had a nonscientific influance in it.
Why cant we just make it to some sort of middle ground? Sure I think we do have an influance on the climate and we should be carefull, but this is not solely man's doing.
Soon we are going to find out that we ended the ice age with the emisions from our cave fires.
Why cant we just make it to some sort of middle ground? Sure I think we do have an influance on the climate and we should be carefull, but this is not solely man's doing.
Soon we are going to find out that we ended the ice age with the emisions from our cave fires.
Some one set us up the death ridge.
Scott Olson
EF5
Some how I think the government had a bigger role in the conclusion of this article than anything else as Bush is trying to apease the enviromentalist and claimed that he was going to do something about america's role in global warming int the state of the union speech. Also one of the #1 things that will be an issue that is laid out on the table for next years election will be global warming. Large amount of the public feel like it is responcible for everything from sunrise to why yesterday wasnt as windy as today, nowthose in power who want to keep their seats and those hopefulls will beable to add even more people to those wo think it is all global warmiongs fault and will be able to feed off that as they try to pull votes their way. I am not saying that the report is total rubbish, but I do have a feeling that it had a nonscientific influance in it.
Why cant we just make it to some sort of middle ground? Sure I think we do have an influance on the climate and we should be carefull, but this is not solely man's doing.
Soon we are going to find out that we ended the ice age with the emisions from our cave fires.
Some one set us up the death ridge.
A middle ground is exactly what the report represents, among thousands of experts who have done climate research. I'm not sure where to even begin to respond to your first assertion but I'd point out that the opposite is more likely true.
Last edited by a moderator:
Mike Smith
Scott, I find your response to Bart interesting. May I ask you to re-read my post #20, dealing with how yesterday's IPCC "whatever it was" (it couldn't be a "summary" since the scientific report it was supposed to "summarize" will not be final for months) and explain why you disagree with Bart. I am sincerely interested in how you reach your conclusion that I'm not sure where to even begin to respond to your first assertion but I'd point out that the opposite is more likely true to Bart's contention that government had a lot to do with what the IPCC released yesterday.
As far as I can tell, government and politics had everything to do with what was released yesterday. So, I am curious as to what leads you to a different conclusion. Or, am I misunderstanding your point?
As far as I can tell, government and politics had everything to do with what was released yesterday. So, I am curious as to what leads you to a different conclusion. Or, am I misunderstanding your point?
Scott Olson
EF5
Governments are part of the process, after all it is a summary for them and the IPCC is to serve and inform it's member countries. It's more of an issue of semantics, with different words having different meanings and effects but the actual content is not going to undergo major alteration by governments otherwise the process would grind to a halt. Just because governemnts are involved doesn't invalidate the findings of the climate scientists who have written the summary . Call me a skeptic but I doubt that there was considerable pressure from the US. It's also unfortunate that there is an effort to discredit the report before it's even fully out.
I'm sure the final report will show more exhaustive supporting information but the conclusions will generally be the same. Some scientists even thought the summary didn't go far enough by not including glacial melting into it's sea rise calculations.
I think you mis-understood here. Bart's assertion was that our government put pressure on the IPCC to hype global warming. I don't agree with this statement but not with the general assertion that governments have no role in the IPCC- they in fact compromise it. This kind of borders on political so I will leave it at that but if you want to discuss the politics more feel free to PM me. It would be nice if this issue could be discussed without the involvement of politics and it is unfortunate that the issue has become so polarized.
Last edited by a moderator:
Alexandre Aguiar
Dear Dan
I try very hard to communicate in English and I understand what you and others post at 99% of the time, but I was ublable to catch your idea. What you mean by "All your rain-free base are belong to us. You have no chance to see tornado make your time".
Alexandre Aguiar
Dear Scott
Regarding political pressures to influence the final text of the IPCC AR 4 I would like to suggest the reading of this article published in the International Herald Trubune I found very useful to show how things were going behind the doors in the UN Panel.
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/02/01/news/warm.php
Two points in the article are very interesting:
The senior authors of the report, from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a UN body convened every five years or so, have been inundated with e-mails and calls from some of the 650 other authors and outside experts eager to see findings tweaked in one direction or another.
With the clock ticking down and translators juggling six official languages, and government representatives trying to insure that findings do not clash with national interests, tussles have intensified between climate experts and political appointees from participating governments.
Alexandre
Regarding political pressures to influence the final text of the IPCC AR 4 I would like to suggest the reading of this article published in the International Herald Trubune I found very useful to show how things were going behind the doors in the UN Panel.
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/02/01/news/warm.php
Two points in the article are very interesting:
The senior authors of the report, from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a UN body convened every five years or so, have been inundated with e-mails and calls from some of the 650 other authors and outside experts eager to see findings tweaked in one direction or another.
With the clock ticking down and translators juggling six official languages, and government representatives trying to insure that findings do not clash with national interests, tussles have intensified between climate experts and political appointees from participating governments.
Alexandre
Chris Nuttall
EF5
He's referring to an Internet cult video.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4826944407865830684
The English translation of this 1980s game was very, very bad. Some guys went and made a music video out of it. It was one of the first cult videoes to hit the World Wide Web.
Sorry for the off-topic post.
Aaron Kennedy
EF5
If it takes the climate change/gw topic to spur this country to start trying to ween itself off fossil fuels, I'm all for it. Personally, I think we should be doing this for health and economic reasons... but hey, whatever. We may be getting to the point where people are starting to shun the topic since the media is so infactuated with it.
Back on topic... I gotta agree with Nuttall on this one. While I'm a proponent of human-induced climate change, I am not so far out there to proclaim hurricanes in past seasons were caused by it (heck we're still trying to undestand decadal and longer term ocean circulations). There are plenty of climate scientists out there that are completely loony. GCMs have plenty of issues, and the jury is still out on whether we're "doomed". Recently, a friend of mine at a certain university attended a seminar by a big name scientist in the hurricane->global warming debate. While I won't name this individual, this scientist could not answer numerous questions about his talk and basically chanted that hurricanes are the direct result of GW over and over.
Back on topic... I gotta agree with Nuttall on this one. While I'm a proponent of human-induced climate change, I am not so far out there to proclaim hurricanes in past seasons were caused by it (heck we're still trying to undestand decadal and longer term ocean circulations). There are plenty of climate scientists out there that are completely loony. GCMs have plenty of issues, and the jury is still out on whether we're "doomed". Recently, a friend of mine at a certain university attended a seminar by a big name scientist in the hurricane->global warming debate. While I won't name this individual, this scientist could not answer numerous questions about his talk and basically chanted that hurricanes are the direct result of GW over and over.
Scott A. Kampas
EF4
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2003
- Messages
- 303
1st part of 4th IPCC report
The first, and juiciest for us, part of the 4th IPCC report is available here:
IPCC Working Group I Fourth Assessment Report Summary for Policymakers (SPM) -- Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis
The first, and juiciest for us, part of the 4th IPCC report is available here:
IPCC Working Group I Fourth Assessment Report Summary for Policymakers (SPM) -- Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis
Mike Smith
Outstanding Series on Global Warming
For part one, go to: www.canada.com/nationalpost/story.html?id=22003a0d-37cc-4399-8bcc-39cd20bed2f6&k=0
For part one, go to: www.canada.com/nationalpost/story.html?id=22003a0d-37cc-4399-8bcc-39cd20bed2f6&k=0
Morgan Palmer
EF5
Global Warming Canceled Due to Ice/Snow
Almost. This makes me laugh hard. MP
HOUSE HEARING ON 'WARMING OF THE PLANET' CANCELED AFTER ICE STORM
HEARING NOTICE
Tue Feb 13 2007 19:31:25 ET
The Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality hearing scheduled for Wednesday, February 14, 2007, at 10:00 a.m. in room 2123 Rayburn House Office Building has been postponed due to inclement weather. The hearing is entitled “Climate Change: Are Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Human Activities Contributing to a Warming of the Planet?â€
The hearing will be rescheduled to a date and time to be announced later.
Almost. This makes me laugh hard. MP
HOUSE HEARING ON 'WARMING OF THE PLANET' CANCELED AFTER ICE STORM
HEARING NOTICE
Tue Feb 13 2007 19:31:25 ET
The Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality hearing scheduled for Wednesday, February 14, 2007, at 10:00 a.m. in room 2123 Rayburn House Office Building has been postponed due to inclement weather. The hearing is entitled “Climate Change: Are Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Human Activities Contributing to a Warming of the Planet?â€
The hearing will be rescheduled to a date and time to be announced later.
David Wolfson
EF5
New study suggests that arctic ice melt is exceeding computer-model forecasts: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6610125.stm
An open summer Arctic Ocean is a powerful positive feedback mechanism to global warming -- Not A Good Thing.
An open summer Arctic Ocean is a powerful positive feedback mechanism to global warming -- Not A Good Thing.
Glenn Dixon
EF2
I found an *excellent* discussion on this whole topic recently - very balanced. My personal belief is that nature is quite capable of large, broad warming without human intervention (like when the last ice age ended). One person in this article attempts to prove a link, but it's still quite tenuous in my book.
http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1690658
http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1690658
Mike Smith
Keep in mind there is a great deal we don't know on this subject. A satellite was built to help answer these questions, but blew up on launch:
www.abc.net.au/science/news/stories/2005/1478409.htm
www.abc.net.au/science/news/stories/2005/1478409.htm
