I am listening to story after story on NPR about how bad the winter weather is this year. But in between I hear some guy interviewed about global warming and what a problem it is. And he didn’t say climate change, he said global warming. I think that anyone currently in an insane asylum should be let out immediately and replaced with anyone who still believes in global warming.
1. ENVIRONMENT/TODAY: Global Warming Causing More Snow? Come Again? — FoxNews.com
Deadline: Feb 01, 2011 11:00 PM EST
Former Vice President Al Gore told Bill O’Reilly that: “A rise in global temperature can create all sorts of havoc, ranging from hotter dry spells to colder winters, along with increasingly violent storms, flooding, forest fires and loss of endangered species.” We need comments from someone who can point out the ridiculousness of his argument, even if you accept the somewhat-implausible argument. I’ve been assigned this story just now by Fox News in New York for the science and technology desk. I’m looking for comments. Please send comments via e-mail. Please send your name, title and company you represent. Please send comments by 10 p.m. CST. Contact: Gene Koprowski, [redacted]
Ecology is extraordinarily relevant. So is astrophysics. Most astrophysists think that the global warming hyperbole is a bunch of hooey.
Do you think that most "climatologists" have a degree in "climatology"? Until a few years ago, there was no such degree. People who call themselves "climatologists" may have degrees in geology, ecology / environmental science, meteorology, or just about anything else.
Patrick Moore has one of those degrees and has spent a lifetime fighting for environment issues. Oh, but he disagrees with cultural leftists who have no education or background in science, like Al Gore, so he needs to be dismissed.
No dice. Patrick Moore is the one of the most credible people on this issue today.
Ecology is extraordinarily relevant. So is astrophysics. Most astrophysists think that the global warming hyperbole is a bunch of hooey.
Really?
Monster snowstorms still spell global warming
By Michio Kaku
Editor's note: Michio Kaku is a professor of theoretical physics at the City University of New York and author of the forthcoming book "Physics of the Future."
I'm glad you agree that the folks who claim that big snowstorms disprove global warming are wrong.
And I agree as well that the controversy is mainly over whether human activity is driving it. I'm glad as well that we agree that the planet is indeed warming.
Now, if you can come up with something else that explains the warming other than rising CO2 from human activity, you'll end the controversy. The problem is that there isn't any reason. So the controversy comes from those who accept the science and those who claim it's all a conspiracy, or promote other views (e.g. it's the sun) that have no basis in fact.
I'm glad as well that we agree that the planet is indeed warming.
Generally, the planet has been warming since the last glacial period 12,500 years go. During the last 12,500 years, we had a short (200 year) cooling period, but it started warming again around 1800.
SUVs did not cause this. I'm pretty sure that they weren't even invented then.
Over the last 10 years, it's generally been cooling again. But we are still in a warming cycle.
Cooling would be much worse than warming to humans because of the food supply.
Something I just learned -- there is only 10% of the bio-diversity at the 45th parallel than there is at the equator. Life on earth really likes hot weather.
Generally, the planet has been warming since the last glacial period 12,500 years go. During the last 12,500 years, we had a short (200 year) cooling period, but it started warming again around 1800.
SUVs did not cause this. I'm pretty sure that they weren't even invented then.
Over the last 10 years, it's generally been cooling again. But we are still in a warming cycle.
Cooling would be much worse than warming to humans because of the food supply.
Something I just learned -- there is only 10% of the bio-diversity at the 45th parallel than there is at the equator. Life on earth really likes hot weather.
True it has been warming, but warming has rapidly accelerated since the early 1970's as a result of increasing atmospheric CO2. Note that solar activity counter-corresponds to warming - solar activity has decreased since the early 1970's. The only explanation now that withstands scrutiny is rising CO2. And isotope testing confirms that the CO2 is coming from human activity.
This is at this point irrefutable.
Yes, life likes hotter weather, but life isn't going to like the rapid transition unlike anything we've seen before.
Speaking of measuring technology, can I share one more thing?
Two weeks ago, a Harvard professor (Howard Smith) said that after studying the 500 extraolar planets discovered, "alien life is impossible". "We are alone in the Universe". Most of those 500 planets were gas giants like Jupiter. Quite a number were "hot Jupiters" that orbited very close to their stars.
Why did we only discover giant planets that orbited close to their stars? Because that's the only thing our technology was capable of discovering.
Yesterday, NASA's Kepler Mission reported it's initial findings (looking at a tiny portion of the sky). 1235 new planets. Most planets are small, not big. Multi-planet systems are common. 54 of the planets are in the habitable zones of their stars.
So, what is the NASA analysis based on evidence? There are billions upon billions of planets in our galaxy and a countless number of them could support life.
I'll bet that Howard Smith wished he would have kept his big mouth shut.
My favorite quote of all time:
"Everything that can be invented has been invented."-- Charles Duell, Commissioner of US Patent Office, 1899
Lesson learned: We don't know squat. Any arrogant SOB who claims to know the answers actually knows even less than the rest of us.
So you don't believe those who say global warming is caused by the sun?
As I stated, Sun cycles are probably part of cause along with cycles in the earth's revolution and rotation. Those are the best explanations today, but we really don't know for sure.
The climate has changed radically for millions of years. Where you live today used to be under hundreds of feet of ice. I doubt that SUVs where the cause of the dangerous warming that enabled you to live to flourish in North America.
Sun cycles are probably part of cause along with cycles in the earth's revolution and rotation.
Except that we can measure both solar and orbit factors. Solar output is lower now than it was in the 1950's, so it can't possibly explain warming since the 1970's, and there are no other changes that line up with the rapid rise of global temps.
Except that we can measure both solar and orbit factors. Solar output is lower now than it was in the 1950's, so it can't possibly explain warming since the 1970's, and there are no other changes that line up with the rapid rise of global temps.
Go google Milankovitch Cycles.
I've told you this before, there are 26,000 year, 41,000 year, 95,000 year, 125,000 year and 413,000 cycles in the earth's axis procession, axis tilt, and orbital shape that are probably the cause of the earth's climate cycles. Sun spots might have an affect too, but not as much has this.
You haven't studied those cycles very closely have you, they suggest that we should be entering an ice age, not rapidly warming. The Milankovitch cycle attributes changes in climate to changes in the earth's wobble as it revolves around the sun, there's no correlation between such a change and the rapid warming since the 1970's.
Again, the only factor that correlates is rising atmospheric CO2.
