The Heat Is On

GENIERE

Tune in to the FOX News Channel special report, ": The Case of Global Warming," on Sunday, Nov. 13, at 8 p.m. and 11 p.m. EST.

Fact? Fiction? Hockeystick?

Pengwuino

What is this, the preview channel?

Andre

Demagogy? fallacies? ratings?

Mk

Lies perhaps even?

Andre

Well that's a big word. Don't forget that there once was a hockey stick, an absolute brain paralyser. Only need to look for a second to comprehend that the world was in immediate danger, confirmed with shiploads of confirmation bias, melting glaciers, heat waves, droughts, storms, floods, it doesn't matter what, it's all global warming of course and of course all caused by burning fossile fuel. So, there is noble task to convince mankind. FOX was just late realizing that.

Pengwuino

did anyone see it?

Andre

It's probably rather predictable. This could be the script, this page once decribes by Stephen McIntyre:

For a refreshing balance

http://www.iaee.org/documents/05fall.pdf (huge file)

Scroll to page 14. the article:
The Skeptics on the Global Warming Issue: The Distinguished Veterans
By Gerald T. Westbrook

Andre

One of the problems of global warming that it is not about science, it's about war. Former allies can turn into tomorrows enemies.

http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/climate...re_climate.pdf

My sympathy for Tony Blair, upon realizing the scam of global warming, he tries to back off, counting out, however, the brave green warriors.

Who will save us from the world savers?

dgoodpasture2005

I've taken a fond liking of the world savers :) they help push technology further. So i've joined the bandwagon, there's nothing to lose... cleaner air and better tech.

WhiteWolf

lol, I saw that, my mom has been a supporter of the global warming arguement, and I went off ranting about how it is a bunch of balogna. Fox reached an all time low, lol. Weather fluctuates, and over the course of centuries time, it can have vast fluctuations in temperature. Glaciers will melt, and then freeze again. You cant treat stuff like that as artwork, it cant be preserved. It may disappear for a period of time, but it will return. Many of these people, just like the person that was ranting on this program last night, doesnt want to let go of stuff like that. Everything will change, it is inevitable, I think they should let go and learn to live with it.

Andre

Really? Suppose you have a limited budget for mitigation of environmental impact of anthropogenic energy production and you have two options:

1. build windmills and reduce the overall emission of exhaust gasses.

2. apply filters to remove soot and toxic chemicals from the exhausts.

If you're on the bandwagon you have to go for option one, whilst in reality option two would have been the more effective.

dgoodpasture2005

and where does the soot and chemicals go once filtered? stay in the filter forever? Or then get burried into the Earth, causing more pollution? It's either get rid of the problem or keep the problem. If you try and damper it, it still persists. As long as we have energy sources that emit soot and chemicals.. we will always have soot and chemicals floating around somewhere.

GENIERE

Your reasoning requires we eliminate trees, grasses, shrubs…

http://www.life.uiuc.edu/plantbio/wimovac/isoprene.htm

Higher plants are known to emit volatile hydrocarbons such as isoprene and monoterpenes into the atmosphere. The World wide emission rate of these natural hydrocarbons has been estimated to be 1.8-8.3 * 1011 kg y-1 which exceeds that of non methane hydrocarbons originating from human sources. Natural hydrocarbons have been suggested to be responsible for the blue haze found around forested areas on sunny days and the high rural ozone concentration in summer. The study of natural hydrocarbon emissions from plants is therefore of key importance to our understanding of the global effects of atmospherically born hydrocarbons.


.

dgoodpasture2005

Now let's try and stay on track here... we were talking about human waste, and the effect it has on the environment...the environment works perfectly fine in it's natural state. If my reasoning required eliminating trees, grasses and shrubs.. i would have made it known. That's like saying... well a lake consists of water.. and clouds precipitate on it... yeah but when you start creating artificial clouds and precipitation, you cause unbalance in the environment and the lake overflows. Still the easier path is letting the Earth go on it's natural course, and stopping human emissions/waste as much as is possible, anywhere and everywhere.

Bystander

Okay, windmills come up. 50 GW installed capacity globally, Europe and U. S. the big users.

Have the climate models been run with this sort of load on circulation in the N. Ferrel cell? Haven't found anything, but haven't tried every conceivable keyword combination as yet.

Order of magnitude, looks to be 0.01% of net solar input (to the N. Ferrel), but whether that's getting into the "significant effect" range is what I was hoping to answer if someone knows of climate models that include wind power loading.

GENIERE

Really? I suppose before humans existed there were no species eradication, ice ages, global warmings, floods, hurricanes, tornados… Obviously the natural environment does not “work just fine”. The natural state of the environment is one of constant change with disastrous consequences to one species or another.

.

dgoodpasture2005

Until you put a humanly expectation or desire on how the environment should act according to you... yes the environment works perfectly fine in it's natural state. Ice ages, species eradication... all natural... all fine. Not until a species starts to unbalance this natural state at catastrophic and extremely dangerous levels do things begin to take perspective. We are now harming the planet because we have gone from a natural force, to an unnnatural force. It's time to go back to natural living. Stop burning chemicals and polluting the atmosphere.. it's not that hard to just say yes. Unless of course you'd like to see just how far we can push mother nature... then I'm sure she can come up with something natural of her own... like species eradication ;) It's all about respect. Just as you'd treat a person good, and expect it back... treat your Home well and you shall be rewarded. Slap it in the face and ignore it's screams for help... and well... we'll only have to wait a few decades to see what the outcome of this one will be, because I'm obviously outnumbered here.(unfortunately) Instead of harming the planet more... we should try and keep it where it has been through the last 5,000 years... even if this means reversing SOME of the "natural?" affects of warming and cooling... but through clean methods. This isn't just a dilemna about whether or not it's causing global warming, we're also destroying the o-zone layer... and i personally like to have a clear view of the stars at night.. the smog doesn't help.