General discussion


Global warming is real, and caused by humans.

By Absolutely ·
Excerpt from**1/2

For the entire article, purchase a membership to

"Hurricanes are born in the warm waters of the tropical Atlantic and Pacific oceans, which are both getting warmer. Over the 20th century, ocean surface temperatures increased by between 0.32 degrees Celsius in the Pacific tropical region and 0.67 degrees C in the Atlantic tropical region. This has correlated with a twofold increase in category-4 and -5 hurricanes over the last 30 years (ScienceNOW, 17 August). Some researchers maintain that these changes in sea surface temperature (SST) are within the natural variability of climate. Others say that the human-caused climate change is the culprit.

"To figure out just how much people are to blame, atmospheric scientist Ben Santer of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California and colleagues compared observed SSTs with the predictions of 22 global climate models. They ran the different models under various physical scenarios, including changes in solar irradiance, volcanic eruptions, and increased sulfate aerosols and greenhouse gas emissions. Only model simulations that included the known human-caused increases in greenhouse gases replicated the observed rise in SST. In total, the team found an 84% probability that two-thirds of the observed temperature changes were caused by human activities. "There is no way of explaining the observed increases without positing a large human impact on these ocean temperatures," Santer says."

Maxwell, don't even start with your BS about political bias: Ben USED the competing models, and they all FAIL to account for the measured change. Address the science, or STFU, please.

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

entire article available for free

by Absolutely In reply to Global warming is real, a ...

Science magazine does not require membership for all articles, and this is a free one, at this time at least. My mistake.

Collapse -

I just watched it

by Oz_Media In reply to Global warming is real, a ...

A documentary on that same observation. It left a few questions but was still most conclusive, probably due to something I missed or was edited due to time restraints. They did show a computer graphic of the Earth had there been NATURAL only compared to what they find is Human contamination.

Quote a big difference really, I have never really questioned it too much though. The naysayers just don't have any relevant facts to counter the rest. Simple, outside the box obervations, but no real scientific facts.

Collapse -

Carbon levels higer than recorded history

by mjwx In reply to Global warming is real, a ...

And ice cores are pretty accurate. I'm talking about the Vostok ice core which has been completely analysed as of last week.
This is a press release from a few years ago

It states that that the natural variance in CO2 levels is between 180 and 280 PPMV (Parts Per Million Volume) but the maximum was recently amended to 320 PPMV in a BBC report last week (which I cant seem to find) as the full results of the analysis were published. The level of CO2 in our atmosphere stated in the above link was 360 PPMV in 1999. In 2005 it was 380 PPMV as stated in this BBC article

20 PPMV in 6 years is an increase far steeper than that recorded in the ice core.

Heres a Reuters story on the subject also it states the maximum CO2 level to be 300 PPMV.

Whist there is some confusion over the exact maximum CO2 level it is nowhere near our current CO2 level.
But there is a global warming hoax of sorts. Those who continue to perpetuate that global warming either
1. Does not exits
2. Is happening within natural limits
3. Humans are not affecting the environment
I call it the "global warming hoax hoax".

Collapse -


by TonytheTiger In reply to Carbon levels higer than ...

CO2 is at the highest level we've ever estimated it to be.

Temperatures are not the highest we have ever estimated it to be.

Therefore the link between temperature and CO2 levels is obviously not what these scientists are claiming it is.

Collapse -

Wrong, Tony

by jalefevre In reply to Right,

***CO2 is at the highest level we've ever estimated it to be. Temperatures are not the highest we have ever estimated it to be. Therefore the link between temperature and CO2 levels is obviously not what these scientists are claiming it is.***

What your observation indicates is that CO2 is not the only contributor to the warming. No one argues that it is. Several contributors (. . . including changes in solar irradiance, volcanic eruptions, and increased sulfate aerosols and greenhouse gas emissions . . .) were reviewed. CO2 is just the most obvious human contribution, and a significant contributor to the current warming.

Collapse -

What caused

by TonytheTiger In reply to Wrong, Tony

the periods of warming that were higher than this one?

All of those things you mentioned (except for the solar irradiance, of course) could be results of global warming, rather than the cause of it. But that possibility won't be investigated (at least not at the scale the other possibilities are), because that is a result they (the politicians who fund the research) don't want to find!

They can run all the models they want, but if all of those models start with a (possibly) false premise (that something on earth is causing global warming), they are going to come to a (possibly) false conclusion. Mankind has a long history of setting out on witch-hunts, and finding witches. Trouble is, by their own belated admissions, witches don't exist.

It reminds me of a joke that made the rounds shortly after the Rodney King trial:

The FBI, the CIA, and the LAPD are all trying to prove that they are the best at apprehending criminals. The President decides to give them a test. He tells them there's a rabbit in the forest and they have to find it. First the CIA goes in. They place animal informants throughout the forest. They question all plant and mineral witnesses. After three months of extensive investigations they conclude that rabbits do not exist. Next the FBI goes in. After two weeks with no leads they burn the forest, killing everything in it, including the rabbit, and they make no apologies. The rabbit had it coming. Finally the LAPD goes in. They come out two hours later with a badly beaten bear. The bear is yelling: "Okay! Okay! I'm a rabbit! I'm a rabbit!"

Collapse -

Dear Mr scarecrow

by Tony Hopkinson In reply to Right,

No it's not you claim they are claiming it is.
No reputable scientist would claim there is any link between CO2 levels and temperature regardless of other factors.
The most they would claim is that at a certain point in certain situations it would become the dominating factor based of the drastically simple model they are using.

Collapse -

Thank you

by TonytheTiger In reply to Dear Mr scarecrow

I think you may have hit it on the head with the second sentence. I don't think reputable scientists are making the claims. It is the press and certain politicians who are claiming that reputable scientists are saying that.

Collapse -

Hold up there, fella

by Tony Hopkinson In reply to Thank you

Big science requires funding, serious funding. To get it you have to support your sponsors reasons for giving you it. The treehuggers 'want' global warming, the money huggers don't. You come out with evidence that doesn't support their view point, they'll squash it, rubbish it, and never fund you again.

The only way those of us without a preset agenda can proceed, is to read all the science and pay special attention to what they don't say, the conclusions they don't draw and the methods they don't use.

Your argument is valid, but for both sides 'scientists', not just those who come out with evidence that supports your beliefs.

Collapse -

The only

by TonytheTiger In reply to Hold up there, fella

belief I have that pertains to this subject is that there is far too little evidence to come to any conclusion.

Related Discussions

Related Forums