It is amazing that so many people believe global warming is real and is caused by humans. This myth has been largely promoted by the major media that gives much attention to those who support it and very little to those who debunk it.

For example, in December, U.S. Sen. James Inhofe of Oklahoma chaired a “Climate Change and the Media” meeting. He said that global warming is a hoax. The meeting received almost no major media attention.

At this meeting, Dr. David Deming, a geophysicist at the University of Oklahoma, stated, “I was contacted by a reporter for National Public Radio. He offered to interview me, but only if I would state that the warming was due to human activity. When I refused to do so, he hung up on me.”

Deming also said that he received an astonishing e-mail from a major researcher in climate change that read, “We have to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period.” From about 800 A.D. to 1300 A.D. we had the Medieval Warm Period where the world was as warm or warmer than it is today. But it is an obstacle to those maintaining that the current warming is abnormal.

People who want to hear the other side can go to www.oism.org/pproject for a scientific debunking of global warming. Also, listed are the names of more than 17,000 scientists, meteorologists and other technical people who have signed a petition stating that there is no convincing scientific evidence to support global warming.

source
http://www.couleenews.com/articles/2007/01...ion/04gwlte.txt

Also there is a link in the article about how this is true as well... with 17,100 signatures from many scientist meteorologist etc.

Sorry, but you are too late. There is no more debate if human activity affects climate change. It is true.

P.S. - Your source doesn't work.

No one's saying that it's human caused. It's humans causeing the climate change to happen more quickly and more destructivly. Which has strong evidence pointing towards the "true" side of this equation.

if there is no more debate then why was this article written? and the petition still going against it?

i understand that humans do not help the warming but we in no way have caused it

plus warming is a natural cycle of the earth

thanks for the posts guys

17,100 people out of billions isn't much if you think about it

The article was written becasue OISM supports the administration, big oil, nuclear power, survivalism and host of other ultra-rightwing wackiness. They advocate homeschooling and building nuclear fallout shelters in your backyard. There not considered a real scientfic institution and they have nobody publishing peer reviewed papers on the subject of global warming. Instead they take bits of info from real papers then misrepresent them to appear to support their theory. They also have the gonads to say that people who want to cut back on the use of fossil fuels actually just want to kill off poor people in developing countries. It's disgusting. They have nothing to do with science, they're a front for ultra-conservative lobbies. They should note that it's liberal organizations that are actually doing the brunt of the charity work in developing countries and who are on the ground helping people while they're hiding in their bunkers.

Just to note, anyone can sign that petition (including you or I) without knowing anything about the field so it means nothing. As for the actual science, I already posted it in the other Global Warming thread going right now. From here on out let's get our evidence from actual peer-reviewed sources. I wouldn't post scientific evidence from MoveOn.org.

Oh please, you guys are so sure of yourselves.

Here's some statistics for you. Volcanoes, hot springs, the ocean itself and other natural objects contribute about 200 billion tons of carbon dioxide into our atmosphere anually.
We humans contribute about 7 billion tons of carbon dioxide ourselves. And all of this CO2 is being absorbed by plants, natural chemical processes, plankton, coral, and other natural phenomena. Also, we started putting out less harmful emissions about 30 years ago. Besides, science contradicts itself by saying that we are just recently exiting an ice age. It's good that we should use "greener" technology, but we're doing it for all the wrong reasons.

I don't know where you get your numbers from but you're way off. From the USGS:

Comparison of CO2 emissions from volcanoes vs. human activities.
Scientists have calculated that volcanoes emit between about 130-230 million tonnes (145-255 million tons) of CO2 into the atmosphere every year (Gerlach, 1999, 1992). This estimate includes both subaerial and submarine volcanoes, about in equal amounts. Emissions of CO2 by human activities, including fossil fuel burning, cement production, and gas flaring, amount to about 22 billion tonnes per year (24 billion tons) [ ( Marland, et al., 1998) - The reference gives the amount of released carbon ©, rather than CO2.]. Human activities release more than 150 times the amount of CO2 emitted by volcanoes--the equivalent of nearly 17,000 additional volcanoes like Kilauea (Kilauea emits about 13.2 million tonnes/year)!

http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/Hazards/What/VolGas/volgas.html

By the way, the ocean absorbs CO2, it doesn't emit it. A net effect of about 10 billion tons. Here's some info on carbon sinks. The main problem being that it would take about a thousand years for the ocean to absorb just the extra carbon we've put into the air. Hence the problem.

http://www.aip.org/pt/vol-55/iss-8/p30.html

up, sorry. I must have been reading that book upside down.

Mainstream, corporate-controlled media has until recently not been all that interested in championing the cause of environmentalism, and I can remember the days when the media covered the issue of climate change with a great deal of skepticism. The scientific evidence, as always, can be debated ad infinitum with both camps being able to substantiate their arguments with sound "scientific" data. But the empirical evidence is becoming quite undeniable; something is happening, and quite rapidly.

KGS

So you chose to ignore all the scientific papers on the subject and the universities showing a great deal of evidence showing that there labs are recording record high temperatures and opt for websites with political agenda.

Seems to me the debate is alive and well, I'm sure you wish it wasn't because the evidence for human-created global warming is so weak, but here we are debating it.

I would love to have anyone explain how the planet has gone through various cycles of ice and warming way before man could be any kind of influence.

But with the exception of a couple of massive mass extinction events related to meteor or super volcanic erruption, climate change has not happened so rapidly, the effect is not just the release of greenhouse gas (something which we do to an extreme extent) but the loss of carbon sinks which also effect the levels of CO2 in the atmosphere and the removal of woodland has been very great in recent years.

Global warming is real enough. Why take the word of thousands of scientists, though? Just look around your own area and try to tell yourself the weather hasn't changed dramatically since 1998 or before.
There are many books out there on the subject.

Now for something different...

For the last four months, Adventure Books of Seattle has been creating a book built from two things:
1) Webform submissions from people around the globe, ordinary folks mostly, who give their opinions, the changes where they live, possible solutions.

2) Before and after images showing the effects of global warming.

The book is titled 'A Thousand Voices - A Testament on Global Warming.' and is edited by yours truly and Geoff Nelder of Great Britain. Mr. Nelder is a teacher and a Post-Graduate Fellow of the Royal Meteorological Society. It's easy to participate, and all submissions except off-topic or spam will be published. Check the Adventure Books Video on why we decided to do the book, or go to the Global Warming Book page at AB and read full details. If you have some thoughts, or an opinion, you may as well have your voice heard...

Just because a small majority of nay-sayers say otherwise, does not change the facts. People denied the holocust and still do to this day. That doesn't mean that debate is alive and well.All the information and facts you seek have been repeated many times, try using the search function. Your choice to ignore & deny is hindering your ability to comprehend the situation at hand.

Granted there have been some recorded changes in climate, but these appear to have been rather gradual, while what's going on now has happened withing the span of about 30-40 years. Just by coincidence, there has been an exponential increase in the use of "fossil" fuels and the emission of other pollutants into the air. Not to mention a significant depletion in the size of the Earth's forests, a process begun early on in the 19th-century.

KGS

lol

The changes have not been gradual. They have been incredably fast.

Um, are you having difficulties with reading comprehension again?

KGS

December 24, 1998...

Christmas Eve that year was the first time I suspected there was a global warming problem.
I'm from Washington State, USA. I looked up at the sky and saw a flight of over sixty geese heading north to Canada. It was FAR too early, but flew to Canada they did. The weather began changing exponentially the following year.

The next year, it started breaking heat records. Winters here have changed dramatically. One minute its windstorms and a million people out of power, (December, 2006) and the next it's heavy rain. Seattle received 75% of its annual rainfall for 2005...in November, 2006.

The cherry blossoms pop weeks too early now. There are dozens of other things I could tell you, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know something's wrong.

KGS3333 hit the nail on the head with his simple explanation.

Warming data allegedly manipulated
Source:ChicagoTribune

Scientists allege White House pressure
A survey by the group found that 150 climate scientists personally experienced political interference in the past five years, for a total of at least 435 incidents.

Source: Reuters

the opening entry for this thread mentioned the medieval warm period, a time when Britain made wines, was caused by several large volcanic eruptions, which as we all know pour more gas and material in to the air than we can in one year.
However, that said, since the beginning of the industrial age we as a species have poured enough gas into the air to in effect act like one or more volcanic eruptions.

The summer was rather mild. It only reached 90 on maybe two occations. (talking about 2005 and 6)

The flooding was *insane* as was the windstorm and snow. However, I've yet to see a single cherry tree in bloom before March. But I did see the geese come back up.. which was startling... I agree.. way way to early for them.

Now don't get me wrong... there is something deffinatly happening, and human incroachment is *not* helping. However to say we had record heat temps here... I'd have to say.. no. Not last year. Not the year before. I do remember that we did have one day hit the tripple digits.. but that was atleast four years ago. And I'm a temprature whore. I keep and inside/outside thermomiter near my desk so I can keep track of how cold/hot it is outside since I have plants that need to come in or can be placed out at differnt times.

The reality is that you are wrong. We will in fact see sea levels rise relatively quickly over the next hundred years. The media actually introduces more of a lopsided view of whether or not humans are causing the problems. The scientists doing the research basically unanimously agree that the earth is heating up and that humans are the cause, the media downplays their research and calls into question whether this is true. This is mainly because multibillion dollar companies and the government run the media and dont want to cause any massive changes to the economy of the world and ruin the wealth of the few.

Insurance companies are already changing their policies based on the research because they dont want to insure poorly planned beach side properties only to have them vanish with more and larger natural disasters.

The UN's report already states that they are 90% sure the heating is caused by humans. Most research says its 100%, but even the UN calls into question some of their results.

We are going to at least double the co2 in the atmosphere and possibly quadruple it in less then 100 years time. Its already at about 400ppm up from 280 about 150 years ago. This is faster then at any time in the past 65 million years.

LOL- check the sources

I checked these links and notice that the project you're referring to was headed by Frederick Seitz-- the same guy who headed the RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company research group in the 70's which discovered that smoking wasn't linked to cancer. Now there's a scientist we can count on! For a brief description of Mr. Seitz' research on tobacco, see http://www.ecosyn.us/adti/Seitz_Tobacco_Crimes.html,

By the way, try Googling some of those 17,000 names along with the word "science"-- you won't find any scientific research, peer reviews, or intellectual publications. The vast majority of these "top scientists" don't even have PhD's. Most of those who do have PhD's specialize in politically oriented fields rather than science.

No, you having trouble with whether it is man made or not?

Given that scientists can't even accurately predict the weather in the next 12-24 hours, I find it laughable that we are actually giving any credence to what they say will happen 50 years from now.

That weather not climate, two different things.

Is it my imagination or did the ozone layer not get a whacking great hole in it? Has that hole stopped growing or did it stop for a while and then restart? Did this not see an increase in the sun's rays getting through and so more increase in skin cancer etc etc.

I tell you this though, a few years ago I could sit outside in the sun for hours on end, that doesn't apply nowadays, I very rarely burn but in the last three or four years it has become more frequent that I have ended up sore and slightly burnt. Quite easy to do when Britian hit a record all time high of over 100 degrees about four years ago.

Was it not due to fossil fuels, CFC gases, emissions from vehicles and planes that helped expand this great big hole in the sky.

Chopping down the rainforests at an astronomical rate each year, that can't have helped either, didn't they have something to do with cloud formation?

We have had more hosepipe bans in Great Britain in the last few years than ever before, not enough rain they say, this is probably due to raping the countryside and putting concrete everywhere, all the rain instead of going down to the water table, dribbles down the drains!

The polar ice caps are melting at a rate that can't be healthy the weather is whacky, we have had several tornadoes in Britain in the last few months, something which may not be unusual in Texas or Oklahoma but it sure is weird when it rips through a city like Birmingham over here! Why don't we get snow at Christmas anymore, it has to be due to the warming of something and it sure isn't my cockles.

To shut our eyes and ears to the problem of global warming will not make it go away, it will just get worse because people think if there really is no problem, then nothing has to be improved. It is a very real problem and one that will not just vanish even if we do put on our headphones and blinkers!

Meteorologists basically produce the research that results in weather forecasts which are such regular failures people have grown used to not trusting them.

If you had a computer which told you that the answer to 2+2 had a 30% probability of being 3 and a 70% probability of being somewhere between 4.6 and 6.2, would you trust it to calculate the proper trajectory of a spaceship going to the moon? I wouldn't. I don't think any sane person would, so why would you trust an area of science which can't correctly predict the weather in a 100 square mile area in the next 24 hours to tell you with any degree of accuracy what will happen to the weather globally in 10, 20, 30, or heck, even 1 year.

I been saying that for years!

Just wait, you'll soon be an ignorant, need to read a history book, sick Republican with no clue about anything, ....( heard it all over here).

The facts be damned sir! Buenos Suerte Amigo

If it only had a 70% chance of being correct it would not be accepted. World climate is not the same as weather, one is meteorology, the other is climitology and they do different things, one uses sattelite images to predict the weather, the other uses global weather patterns and predictive models to predict a future climate. These things are not the same.

They're based on the same things, Matt. They're studying the same things, but one (climatology) is just more pretentious than the other, and really has no way of being tested.

They produce theoretical models that get tested by seeing whether they actually happen and are peer reviewed by and examined by the various factor they have put in that affects them. Meteorolgy is about examining weather on a short scale and require much more accuracy than predicting long term weather patterns, which require averages and much less specific accuracy.

The verdict has been out on global warming for awhile now.

It's happening and it's being accelerated by people.

I compare the Climate change non believers to the "cigarettes aren't bad for you" types back when studies showed how bad cigarettes really are for you. Not only is it stupid, but it's only making things worse to let people, (Big *cough* oil companies *cough*) try and confuse the subject of global warming to slow down change so their companies won't go down.

If you have read even a little bit on what is going on it's hard to be skeptical of global warming and the cause.

They are not at all based on the same thing. Meteorology is looking at satellite images, ground based radar and ground based temperature to make an immediate predicition and is actually far more accurate than you characterize. Climatology on the other hand involves atmospheric chemistry, oceanic chemistry, worldwide monitoring of ocean currents and ocean temperature, ice and glacial flows and melting rates both historic and current, study of flora fossils and the chemical make up of stratas, the chemical signatures of ancient ice, the effects of vulcanism on the atmosphere, the effects of the earth's orbit and suncycles and a whole lot more. It's a multidisciplary field that involves chemistry, physics, biology, astronomy, geology, paleontology, botany, geophysics and endless more. Meteorology it's not. Perhaps you should examine the evidence before so offhandedly dismissing it.

OK as you know we don't always agree and here is an example. Today on the news European scientists are acknowledging this is a Global Warming problem.! Plus Al Gore is up for a Nobel Peace Prize for his research and insight into this and has been for a few years now.

Watch An Inconvenient Truth, then come back here. Let's see if your opinion changes at all. If you truly want to know, and are not merely biased in the opinion you've stated, then you'll want to learn more, and will be willing to watch it.

I wish some of you who are in denial about global warming could see some of the submissions Adventure Books has received to our global warming book. We've received about half of the one thousand comments going into the book.
They come to us from all kinds of people, all over the globe.
They all tell the same story, some more intense than others. One came from a guy stationed at a research station on the coast of Antarctica. This was his third tour of the station in twelve years. He spoke of huge sections of ice sheets simply breaking and floating into the open ocean. They've had to change the maps, so much has disappeared.

Firefighters, students, housewives, kids, plain folks. They say the same damn thing. The weather is changing where they live, and not for the better.
Sometimes, you don't need a scientist to tell you things are screwed up. They just verify your suspicions. (lol)

Phht! That's just that dang Seattle hippie talk!

*snickers* XD

We havn't had snow here in 19 years. >.>

And recently, for the past 4-5 years, I can wear shorts year round. Hell, we don't even have "winter" anymore. No bull shiz.

Well, on the front page of "The Autralian" (thats a newspaper,btw) we have a headline that says "It's certain: Humans caused planet to heat up". I don't think that you can get more obvious than that

Agreed. Common sense should prevail.

Global warming *is* an issue. And, with that issue comes another --we've poisoned our life support system which, in turn, is poisoning the inhabitants of this magnificent garden we reside on. Only toxic entities can reside in a toxic environment. It's testimony to our insanity, imo. Who, in their right mind, would poison their life support system? Only humanity -- we're out of balance with nature. In fact, we've upset that balance.

The respiratory diseases that have become epidemic, as well as autism in children, and more cancers - like colon cancer and leukemia are becoming the norm.

Is there any wonder that behaviors are becoming more violent or erratic? We're altering our biochemistry with the spewage we create. Some of those toxins/chemicals adhere to our body and brain and will never flush out. All of this insane devastation for the want of a dollar.
And we call ourselves the intelligent species... The mind boggles.

Meteorology is the interdisciplinary scientific study of the atmosphere that focuses on weather processes and forecasting. Meteorology, climatology, atmospheric physics, and atmospheric chemistry are sub-disciplines of the atmospheric sciences.

Climatology is the study of climate, scientifically defined as weather conditions averaged over a period of time, and is a branch of the atmospheric sciences.Climatology is approached in a variety of ways. Paleoclimatology seeks to reconstruct past climates by examining records such as ice cores and tree rings (dendroclimatology). The study of contemporary climates incorporates meteorological data accumulated over many years, such as records of rainfall, temperature and atmospheric composition. Knowledge of the atmosphere and its dynamics is also embodied in models, either statistical or mathematical, which help by integrating different observations and testing how they fit together. Modeling is used for understanding past, present and potential future climates. Historical climatology is the study of climate as related to human history and thus focuses only on the last few thousand years.

Differences with meteorology:
In contrast to meteorology, which studies short term weather systems lasting up to a few weeks, climatology studies the frequency with which these weather systems occurred in the past. It studies the periodicity of weather events over years to millennia, as well as changes in long-term average weather patterns, in relation to atmospheric conditions. Climatologists, those who practice climatology, study both the nature of climates - local, regional or global - and the natural or human-induced factors that cause climates to change. Climatology considers the past and can help predict future climate change.

Source

I see we have a mixture of for and against..........do we have someone that thinks Global Warming is in runaway mode?

I would like to hear all the reasons and factors that make you think it is really happening, unless the believers can only parrot what others say...

I know posi, I'm glad we can continue to be friends despite our different views.

I think it's funny that Al Gore is up for the Nobel Peace Prize for talking about something.. a lot, and doing, nothing, in fact with all his flying around and the SUVs he and his security team drive around in, isn't he contributing to global warming? What did he DO about global warming during those 8 years that Bill Clinton was diddling young interns in the Oval Office?

But, here's a link to an article I posted on another thread here.

LINK

Here are some of the highlights of the article:




As you can see, there are scientists who have evidence that indicates man does not play much of an impact.

It's not that I don't think there is some warming going on so much as I have serious doubts that man is having much of an impact on driving it, and may have very little impact in stopping it. Instead of wasting all this energy, research time, and money trying to place the blame on man (especially rich men) for a process which has been active on this planet since way before man could have been much of a variable, we should be researching and planning on how we are going to survive through a process that seems to be part of our planets natural cycle.

this still applies, nothing has changed.........

Letter to the Editor
13/11/1997
The Greenhouse Hoax

The doom merchants claim that a runaway greenhouse effect is about to cause global flooding because of the emissions of industry and cows!

Not so, the Greenhouse Effect has kept earth habitable for the past 500 million years despite the awesome disturbances of a temporary nature caused by meteors, volcanoes and polar shifts, plus the normal extremes caused by solar fluctuations and the seasonal variations known as Milankovich cycles.

Every global extreme for the past 5000 years has coincided with fluctuations in solar output! The heat waves of the Sumerian, Pyramid, Stonehenge, Roman and the Medieval Maximums were all due to increased sunspot activity; whereas the Egyptian, Homeric, Greek, Sporer and the Maunder Minimums or little ice ages were all caused by reduced sunspot activity.

The greenhouse effect has kept our planet at +15degC mean temperature within a 5deg range for the past 150,000 years. Solar output can vary by a range of 3% which represents 8.64deg on the Kelvin scale, more than capable of causing the last 10 changes.

The natural earth cycles of orbit, tilt and wobble known as the Milankovich mechanism, are the causes of ice ages and interglacials such as we live in.

Therefore, all of these effects of a lasting nature were caused by the Sun! Every event predates the Industrial Revolution and the falsely blamed CO2 increases!

The greenhouse gases of water vapour, oxygen, CO2, methane and nitrous oxide allow solar radiation to reach and warm the earth, excess heat is radiated back into space as infrared. There are no gases in the atmosphere that can block this infrared at the windows of 3-4 and 8-12 microns, therefore an increase in quantity of gases can make no change.

Albedo is another control where more heat increases evaporation and clouds that will reflect more incoming solar radiation away from earth.

Even if mans feeble efforts could heat the atmosphere, the polar caps will not melt, as the ocean contains 1 million times the energy of the atmosphere. Only the Milankovich cycles can melt the polar ice!

Carbon tax is being levied on a Green"Hoax" theory that ignores the facts of past paleo history and atmospheric logic, and the 1940-1980 period where earth cooled 0.3deg while the CO2 levels were increasing!

Noel Mc Donald
Geelong

Biblio. 1989 John Daly The Greenhouse Trap
1990 John Gribbin Hothouse Earth
1982 H Lamb Climate History & The Modern World
. N Calder The Manic Sun
1989 F Pearce Turning Up The Heat
9 Aug 1997 New Scientist Global Roulette
1992 CSIRO Science of the enhanced Greenhouse effect
1 May 1993 Info Unit Climate Change Fact sheet #6
1994 American Geol. Soc Global warming update
1997 Univ. of Oslo Papers on global warming
. Scientific American The case of the missing sunspots. John Eddy
. Greenpeace Dire implication of enhancing greenhouse effect
. The New Australian Scientists expose global warming hoax
. Nat. Advisory Comm Grappling with greenhouse
1989 Sellers & Blong The Greenhouse Effect
24 Oct 1997 Geelong Advertiser Global Warming....Editorial
24 Oct 1997 Geelong Advertiser Rising seas may swamp homes

It ignores the unprecidented rates of change however. With such rapid changes in temperature in recent it is no suprise that there human implications to the changes. The rates of greenhuse emmision have also been constantly increasing over the 150 years. It is far more likely that the increases reached a critical level along with a cumulative effect tied in with removal of carbon sinks which have also been in constant decline in the last 150 years.

I believe that this planet has been getting warmer the day it was created. it seems that there is alot of grants for these groups that think humans are to blame for global warming

James Spann a operational meteorology since 1978 also doesn't believe that humans are to blame. the Weather channel wants to take away his AMS certification becuse of his views.
James Spann's blog

No there have definatly been times when it has gotten considerably colder. The Earth was warmer when there was no land over the south pole and when there still existed the trans-American seaway.
It is not just groups of people who believe that human effects are to blame for global warming, but the majority of the scientific community and the vast majority of those who have studied the data agree that it is related to human effects.

Mexican Standoff here. Time will tell which one of us is right! I know for a fact that I am right,according to my sources.