Notices

View Poll Results: CLIMATE CHANGE - Mankinds destruction or just the Earths natural cycle - you decide !!

Voters
16. You may not vote on this poll
  • Mankind's fault

    10 62.50%
  • Natural cycle

    6 37.50%
Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Climate change poll

  1. #1 Climate change poll 
    Forum Professor leohopkins's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Dulwich, London, England
    Posts
    1,417
    CLIMATE CHANGE - Mankinds destruction or just the Earths natural cycle - you decide !!


    The hand of time rested on the half-hour mark, and all along that old front line of the English there came a whistling and a crying. The men of the first wave climbed up the parapets, in tumult, darkness, and the presence of death, and having done with all pleasant things, advanced across No Man's Land to begin the Battle of the Somme. - Poet John Masefield.

    www.leohopkins.com
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    The Doctor Quantime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    4,546
    I did a calculation not long ago. Humankinds intervention has accelerated the Earths next Ice age by 4% per thousand years. Not much really. We are not doing any favours but still.

    Look at this, Britain causes naff all pollution compared to the US or China. The USA contributes 25% of the worlds pollution. Carbon footprint is rubbish, if you went on a Boeing 777 that alone contributes more pollution than if you drove an average car for 70 years!

    Natural changes due to old Sol:





    It is correlation close to perfection. The variations are due to the minor intervention of man I think.


    "If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe". - Carl Sagan
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    It is correlation close to perfection.
    The first chart shows sunspot observations, the black line following an average. Most things correlate to themselves pretty well :-)

    The 2nd chart shows solar irradiance matches sunspots pretty well but within a total range of about 1 Watt. Looking at the top chart again it appears the range within the 11 year cycle is from nearly zero to 200 sunspots a year. So what do the two charts tell us when combined? It might appear there are longer period with very low sunspots and perhaps 1 W lower irradiance.

    While one watt might be significant, its but a fraction of the 4 Watts of increased Co2 based forcing predicted by the middle of the 21st century.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Perth, Western Australia
    Posts
    33
    Quote Originally Posted by svwillmer
    I did a calculation not long ago. Humankinds intervention has accelerated the Earths next Ice age by 4% per thousand years. Not much really. We are not doing any favours but still.

    Look at this, Britain causes naff all pollution compared to the US or China. The USA contributes 25% of the worlds pollution. Carbon footprint is rubbish, if you went on a Boeing 777 that alone contributes more pollution than if you drove an average car for 70 years!

    Natural changes due to old Sol:





    It is correlation close to perfection. The variations are due to the minor intervention of man I think.
    A remarkable statistic!

    For more information, svwillmer, I suggest the YouTube video of David Attenborough on Global Warming as he used to be a skeptic but is now no longer and he shows you the graph that changed his mind.

    I'll go and find it and post it here and you can tell me what you think.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9ob9WdbXx0
    Women and children can be careless but never men.

    Everything is OK in the end. If it's not OK it's not the end.

    Use attack as your indestructible spiritual strength.

    Awareness is the spirit. Attack is the foundation of thought.

    Attack like thunder from the heavens. Retreat like dust of the earth.

    "An don' let any girlie boys tell yo dif'runt"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Perth, Western Australia
    Posts
    33
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox
    It is correlation close to perfection.
    The first chart shows sunspot observations, the black line following an average. Most things correlate to themselves pretty well :-)

    The 2nd chart shows solar irradiance matches sunspots pretty well but within a total range of about 1 Watt. Looking at the top chart again it appears the range within the 11 year cycle is from nearly zero to 200 sunspots a year. So what do the two charts tell us when combined? It might appear there are longer period with very low sunspots and perhaps 1 W lower irradiance.

    While one watt might be significant, its but a fraction of the 4 Watts of increased Co2 based forcing predicted by the middle of the 21st century.
    Do you have any links regarding this predicted 4 Watts of increased CO2 based forcing...!?!
    Women and children can be careless but never men.

    Everything is OK in the end. If it's not OK it's not the end.

    Use attack as your indestructible spiritual strength.

    Awareness is the spirit. Attack is the foundation of thought.

    Attack like thunder from the heavens. Retreat like dust of the earth.

    "An don' let any girlie boys tell yo dif'runt"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    The Doctor Quantime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    4,546
    Quote Originally Posted by Deathridesahorse
    Quote Originally Posted by svwillmer
    I did a calculation not long ago. Humankinds intervention has accelerated the Earths next Ice age by 4% per thousand years. Not much really. We are not doing any favours but still.

    Look at this, Britain causes naff all pollution compared to the US or China. The USA contributes 25% of the worlds pollution. Carbon footprint is rubbish, if you went on a Boeing 777 that alone contributes more pollution than if you drove an average car for 70 years!

    Natural changes due to old Sol:





    It is correlation close to perfection. The variations are due to the minor intervention of man I think.
    A remarkable statistic!

    For more information, svwillmer, I suggest the YouTube video of David Attenborough on Global Warming as he used to be a skeptic but is now no longer and he shows you the graph that changed his mind.

    I'll go and find it and post it here and you can tell me what you think.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9ob9WdbXx0
    Uh Oh . Whats it called when you are hit by a ton of bricks? If its that steep since the 1970's, its not going to stop getting steeper is it? Oh dear. I better start doing something. Thanks for that .
    "If you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe". - Carl Sagan
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    Quote Originally Posted by Deathridesahorse

    While one watt might be significant, its but a fraction of the 4 Watts of increased Co2 based forcing predicted by the middle of the 21st century.
    Do you have any links regarding this predicted 4 Watts of increased CO2 based forcing...!?!
    There are a number of sources but you can start here:

    http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/222.htm

    From simple 1D to far more complex models show about a 4W/M^2 radiative forcing increase from doubling Co2 since pre-industrial averages. We'll likely far surpass this before the end of the century. This effect will be much stronger than the changes in solar forcing over of the past 400 years, or predicted in solar models.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8 GW 
    Forum Freshman tkkenyon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    www.tkkenyon.com
    Posts
    11
    MMGW is a fascinating topic. I'm a bio person (virologist and neurosci,) so the only thing that I bring to the MMGW table is that, when I read a paper, I look at the figures first, then the techniques, then the intro and background, and only then read what the authors believe their conclusions to be.

    I'm skeptical. I don't mean that I disbelieve it. I'm a serious fence-sitter.

    I published the following essay at my blog, "Science For Non-Majors"

    Global Warming data at S4NM

    The urban heat island effect certainly accounts for some of the sharp rise seen on the scary graph that spikes up in the 1970s. I don't like the data that is out there, right now. It seems awfully incomplete and artifact-ridden, to me. Occam's Razor is not satisfied.

    Interestingly, when I published that essay, I got hate mail from people who were outraged that I didn't "believe" and "accept" that MMGW is ruining the planet. You could have inserted "Jesus" or "Mohammed" in the place of MMGW, and the hate emails would have still made perfect sense. The haters were upset that I didn't *believe* it. They did not address my reservations about the data. They didn't refer to the fact that at the end of the essay I said conservation is a great idea in its own right and listed reasons why everyone should do it whether or not MMGW is occurring. It worries me, a lot, that MMGW is literally becoming a sacred cow, a religion that cannot be challenged without ad hominum attacks and cries of "Infidel!" Rational, scientific discussion about the data seems to be rare.

    TK
    TK Kenyon

    Author of RABID: A Novel "What begins as a riff on Peyton Place smoothly metamorphoses into a philosophical battle between science and religion. …Kenyon creates four very subtle and intriguing central characters. A novel quite unlike most standard commercial fare, a genre-bending story--part thriller, part literary slapdown with dialogue as the weapon of choice that makes us laugh, wince, and reflect all at the same time. Kenyon is definitely a keeper.” --Booklist Starred Review.

    Author of CALLOUS: A Novel, May, 2008
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9 Re: GW 
    Forum Sophomore andre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    172
    Quote Originally Posted by tkkenyon
    . It worries me, a lot, that MMGW is literally becoming a sacred cow, a religion that cannot be challenged without ad hominum attacks and cries of "Infidel!" Rational, scientific discussion about the data seems to be rare.

    TK
    TK, what we witness here is an extreme form of groupthink, which has thoroughly be analyzed by Irving Janis but then pertaining unlucky political decisions (Bay of Pigs, Vietnam) because the policy makers were victims of groupthink. The symptoms of which are:

    1, Illusion of invulnerability –Creates excessive optimism that encourages taking extreme risks.

    2. Collective rationalization – Members discount warnings and do not reconsider their assumptions.

    3. Belief in inherent morality – Members believe in the rightness of their cause and therefore ignore the ethical or moral consequences of their decisions.

    4. Stereotyped views of out-groups – Negative views of “enemy” make effective responses to conflict seem unnecessary.

    5. Direct pressure on dissenters – Members are under pressure not to express arguments against any of the group’s views.

    6. Self-censorship – Doubts and deviations from the perceived group consensus are not expressed.

    7. Illusion of unanimity – The majority view and judgments are assumed to be unanimous.

    8. Self-appointed ‘mindguards’ – Members protect the group and the leader from information that is problematic or contradictory to the group’s cohesiveness, view, and/or decisions
    Now if you apply this list to the symptoms of the AGW phenomenon, you will see a most stunning fit. Each and every symptom can be recognized with a plethora of examples.

    Actually the eve of each big war, including the last invasion of Iraq is the result of groupthink. We are entering dark ages.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •