Is Global Warming a Real Threat?

[Gokul43201]

I'm talking about this thread, Andre.

And it's pretty clear that the questions asked in the OP are about ethics in education and the Government policy in China regarding education as well as implementation of energy policy.

 

[Evo]

So, then are we going to talk about the science at some point?

In my opinion, the science is in published, peer-reviewed papers. Discussion of that science belongs here.

It is discussing the science, go to the report and read the first comment, read all of the comments, this is the direct input from the scientists. These are the scientists discussing the peer reviewed papers, they are not discussing politics, policy, etc... that is a different IPCC document.

http://pds.lib.harvard.edu/pds/view/7794905?n=2&imagesize=1200&jp2Res=.25

Do you disagree that this document is discussing the science?

I think I will split the science discussion off from the rest of the thread, as I agree, Gokul, on not mixing the two discussions.

 

[Gokul43201]

The document is discussing the science, but none of us in this thread are. Like you said, the thread has two different themes in it, and one is somewhat unrelated to the OP. I think a split is the right decision.

After that, you can also delete my posts that deal with thread administration.

 

[Evo]

The document is discussing the science, but none of us in this thread are. Like you said, the thread has two different themes in it, and one is somewhat unrelated to the OP. I think a split is the right decision.

After that, you can also delete my posts that deal with thread administration.

I will do so and clean up. I would prefer to discuss the science side as the political side is just a bunch of hot air and media sensationalism. I'd like a discussion without the drama. What the scientists are discussing is pretty interesting, and both viewpoints are represented in the report.

 

[latecommer]

As a geologist with emphasis is paleo studies, of course climate comes into play in nearly all of the research I have done. Causation is not a big part of it however. What i do believe and understand is that we have very clear evidence of two things... Climate has cycles now and before human beings could have any forcing ability, and also that it has been much colder and much hotter than it is today. Most of the great diversity of life occurred in periods of higher temperature.
Now it appears that it is more likely that we are entering a cooling or dimming period than that we are getting warmer. The causes of the cooling could be some of many proposed hypothesis including deminished activity on the Sun (which is happening without question)
I really put very little credence into the fears of sudden sea level rise. There has been virtually no change in the steady rise since the last glaciation ( a very typical result after glaciations) It seems likely that most interglacials follow very much the same pattern this one has. An abrupt rise in sea levels early in the interglacial and a steady rise there after, continuing throught to the next glacial event. The same is true of the various glaciers on Earth. They advance and retreat on a cycle that follows such events as the LIA, and the medievil warming.
IMO those who are raising the alarms about global warming are looking at far too small a picture. Humans being what we are tend to think in terms of life times, while the Earth lives on a much longer scale.
Personally I see nothing near or far term about climate to cause the kind of concern some of my associates fear.

 

[Skyhunter]

That is not a discussion of Earth sciences. It is a deceptive petition from the people who brought you intelligent Design.