SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - Warming on hold.......cooling on the way?

SUBSIM Radio Room Forums (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/index.php)

- General Topics (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/forumdisplay.php?f=175)

- - Warming on hold.......cooling on the way? (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=114748)

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimbuna

Quote:

Temperatures are extremly high here during spring March, April, May, June

Send a few degrees over to Northern England mate :D

I spare some for my holidays in november (Scotland).

Interesting thread here. Enjoyed reading very much!

I would like to know if anyone here is a 'real' scientist by profession?

Well, concerning me, I'm a geologist.;)

Thniper

...

Quote:

I spare some for my holidays in november (Scotland).

You might just need them :yep:

To be honest I am less concerned with Global Warming, and more concerned with the effect of pumping these chemicals into the air has on respiratory ailments. Like the "Killer Fogs" of London for instance. Additionally, look at the asthma problem in Los Angeles.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...storyId=873954

http://www.lapublichealth.org/mch/CHI/chi_asthma.htm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thniper

Interesting thread here. Enjoyed reading very much!

I would like to know if anyone here is a 'real' scientist by profession?

Well, concerning me, I'm a geologist.;)

Thniper

...

No, thats why all the confusion. :lol:

We could start a thread about evolution, with a geologist in the ranks. http://www.langkawi.dk/smileys/b137.gif

As part of its global disaster series the History Channel has included shows devoted to the Medieval Warming Period and the Little Ice Age claiming that these periods of history really did occur and were responsible for growth of civilizations during the warm periods and plaques and deaths from starvation on the cold periods. They claim that the Medieval Warm Period was a time of plenty when Vikings settled Greenland and the Little Ice Age as a time when the Vikings perished in Greenland, the Mayan civilization disappeared and cold temperatures caused failure of grain crops in Europe causing starvation and the onset of the Black Plague.

These periods of time are vehemently denied by the International Panel on Climate Control and Al Gore’s office. These supposed periods of history are at odds with the models and theories of the IPCC and with Al Gore’s movie “The Inconvenient Truth” These organizations consider these periods of history as anecdotal or they never did exist.

The IPCC has issued a statement urging protests and a boycott of the History Channel unless these fictitious and outlandish tales are stopped at once. These depictions of history cannot be accurate as they do not fit our model and therefore must be inaccurate. We are demanding that they stop the showing of these programs and replace them with documentaries that show there were hidden areas of earth outside that of known civilizations that experienced historically cold temperatures to balance the record of known civilizations. A UN spokesman also said that there would be an emergency meeting of the IPCC as soon as the weather cools enough to for the members to go to Hawaii.

Al Gore’s office issued a statement saying, “These programs by the History Channel are blatantly fictitious and have been proven false by my many lectures, books and by my movie The Inconvenient Truth. These are settled matters and the only question is what we do now, not what happened in the past. I urge everyone to boycott The History Channel and remember to come to my concerts in July which will prove how warm the earth is getting. Buy your tickets now while they last and don’t forget, I haven’t ruled out running in ‘08 completely.”

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fish

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thniper

Interesting thread here. Enjoyed reading very much!

I would like to know if anyone here is a 'real' scientist by profession?

Well, concerning me, I'm a geologist.;)

Thniper

...

No, thats why all the confusion. :lol:

We could start a thread about evolution, with a geologist in the ranks. http://www.langkawi.dk/smileys/b137.gif

That thread would be even more 'theoretical' than this one here, hehehe :lol:
But if you like I'll join in...

.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thniper

[:lol:
But if you like I'll join in...

.

No, but it come's along sooner or later. :know:

This talks about how Rain Forests are better than Northern Forests at reducing Global Warming.

http://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.js...=NSF&from=news

Any source for that rubbish, waste?

I found a post on comcast forums, that's about it

*ignores*

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tchocky

Any source for that rubbish, waste?

I found a post on comcast forums, that's about it

*ignores*

It was satire T. (trenchant wit, irony, or sarcasm used to expose and discredit vice or folly). Someone sent it to me.

I think my sense of humour is dying by the day :(

Sooner or later I'll be taking everything seriously.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tchocky

I think my sense of humour is dying by the day :(

Sooner or later I'll be taking everything seriously.

Sometimes I feel the same buddy!

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/s...-27197,00.html

[QUOTE]KEVIN Trenberth is head of the large US National Centre for Atmospheric Research and one of the advisory high priests of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). A New Zealander by birth, Trenberth has had a distinguished career as a climate scientist with interests in the use of computer General Circulation Models (GCMs), the basis for most of the public alarm about dangerous global warming. When such a person gives an opinion about the scientific value of GCMs as predictive tools, it is obviously wise to pay attention.
In a remarkable contribution to Nature magazine's Climate Feedback blog, Trenberth concedes GCMs cannot predict future climate and claims the IPCC is not in the business of climate prediction. This might be news to some people.
[/QUOTE]

Quote:

Originally Posted by August

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/s...-27197,00.html

Wow, I don't know who this Carter chap is, but I wonder if he's always this selective in his quotes.
I'm not sure what his motives are, but comparing the original post by Trenberth to Carter's representation of it, I can't help but see paragraphs and quotes being wrought to fit a conclusion.

Just from a cursory glance at the two side-by-side

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carter

GCMs "assume linearity" which "works for global forced variations, but it cannot work for many aspects of climate, especially those related to the water cycle . . . the science is not done because we do not have reliable or regional predictions of climate". Strange that. I could have sworn that I heard somewhere that the science was supposed to be settled.

Now compare this with the source text.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trenberth

The IPCC report makes it clear that there is a substantial future commitment to further climate change even if we could stabilize atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases. And the commitment is even greater given that the best we can realistically hope for in the near term is to perhaps stabilize emissions, which means increases in concentrations of long-lived greenhouse gases indefinitely into the future. Thus future climate change is guaranteed.
So if the science is settled, then what are we planning for and adapting to? A consensus has emerged that “warming of the climate system is unequivocal” to quote the 2007 IPCC Fourth Assessment Working Group I Summary for Policy Makers (pdf) and the science is convincing that humans are the cause. Hence mitigation of the problem: stopping or slowing greenhouse gas emissions into the atmosphere is essential. The science is clear in this respect.
However, the science is not done because we do not have reliable or regional predictions of climate. But we need them. Indeed it is an imperative! So the science is just beginning. Beginning, that is, to face up to the challenge of building a climate information system that tracks the current climate and the agents of change, that initializes models and makes predictions, and that provides useful climate information on many time scales regionally and tailored to many sectoral needs.

Science is never "done", that much is clear. A semantic disagreement between "settled" and "consensus" does not say what Carter would like it to.