NCAAbbs

Your thoughts?

Maybe.

It's just the Earth doing it's thang.

Yes, but I don't know if it is man or not man. You didn't give an option for that. I don't believe there is anything conclusive either way, yet.

BTW, even if it is a cyclical pattern, I still think at this moment the earth is getting warmer, thus I consider that "global warming".

Oh, Jesus,


Guys do me a favor and just watch an Inconvient Truth. Just look at the ice core data and how internal memos from Big Oil have tried to combat Global Warming. If you wanted me to watch something I swear I would. A Rush Limbaugh show.... I would listen. Many of you won't even watch it because of your preconcieved opinions.

State of Denial...................


Iraq...................

Global Warming........................

Stem Cells........................

the list goes on and on.

Machiavelli Wrote:State of Denial...................


Iraq...................

Global Warming........................

Stem Cells........................

the list goes on and on.

In psychology, psychological projection (or projection bias) is a defence mechanism in which one attributes ("projects") to others, one

Machiavelli Wrote:State of Denial...................


Iraq...................

Global Warming........................

Stem Cells........................

the list goes on and on.

Come on, debate/discuss the topics, don't just toss insults and blanket statements.

Nothing gets through to you, does it Dogger?

Please, 'splain this to an evil Conservative that wants to destroy the planet he lives on:

Why are ice caps melting on Mars?

How many ice ages have we been through throughout the history of this planet?

How many occurred while humans were around? Walking? Driving SUV's?

Enquiring Minds wanna know.

If the anti-Capitalistic lefties would leave out the whole "Man causes global warming" we could have an intelligent debate on the matter. They won't, so it won't happen.

The ego is not the problem, my super ego is. I feel I have a stronger Super-Ego than most. The problem is the one's whose Id's have gone crazy. With this issue in particular or Id's have run amok. I can have everything I want with no consequences. Somewhere we have to face reality.

Machiavelli Wrote:The ego is not the problem, my super ego is. I feel I have a stronger Super-Ego than most. The problem is the one's whose Id's have gone crazy. With this issue in particular or Id's have run amok. I can have everything I want with no consequences. Somewhere we have to face reality.

Not going to answer my questions?

The ice core isotopes and gas bubbles show a strict correlation between CO2 and temperature. Rent an inconvient truth. They have an excellent power point program on this. The problem is no where in the earth's history do we have as much CO2 in the atmosphere as we do now and it keeps on accumulating. Will you rent it from Blockbuster at least. It does a great job explaining it. Far better than I can do.

Machiavelli Wrote:The ice core isotopes and gas bubbles show a strict correlation between CO2 and temperature. Rent an inconvient truth. They have an excellent power point program on this. The problem is no where in the earth's history do we have as much CO2 in the atmosphere as we do now and it keeps on accumulating. Will you rent it from Blockbuster at least. It does a great job explaining it. Far better than I can do.

I'd rather watch that dumb*** movie Kazaam.

Machiavelli Wrote:The ice core isotopes and gas bubbles show a strict correlation between CO2 and temperature. Rent an inconvient truth. They have an excellent power point program on this. The problem is no where in the earth's history do we have as much CO2 in the atmosphere as we do now and it keeps on accumulating. Will you rent it from Blockbuster at least. It does a great job explaining it. Far better than I can do.

I went searching for "ice core isotopes and gas bubbles" to see what I could turn up.

I found this article along with many others. I am not sure what they mean, but I found some of this interesting.

[quote]The Greenland records show that climate changes have been very large, rapid, and widespread. Coolings were achieved in a series of steep ramps or steps and warmings in single steps. The more dramatic of the warmings have involved approx 8

I think we should do all we can to come up with clean burning technologies and to do the best we can to clean up the Earth. With that said I think the Global Warm thing is a bit over hyped and we dont understand it yet but there are those out there especially on the left that want to politicize the hell out of it and some who just depend on their funding from hyping it.
One thing is for sure and that is. it is easier on man and its enviornment to go through warming cycles then it is to survive ice ages.

http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=77195

We have tested Ice sheets core samples back 650,000 years. Never have C02 concentrations been over 300 ppm. Today we are at 375 ppm. We are gaining on avg. 2 ppm every year. When you consider 275 ppm would throws us back into an ice age what will happen when we go over 400 ppm. In the next 50 years we will find out if we don't do something about it. There is BIG MONEY in throwing doubt into this equation. Casting doubt on global warming as a theory. Now in science a theory is well tested and never disprovened. Some people get confused and think of scientific laws vs. theories. Like a theory can one day graduate into a law. Nothing is farther from the truth and big oil and those who doubt evolution have been very effective in planting seeds of doubt in our public's mind. As long as their is DOUBT some people could care less. It's like the frog who needs the sudden shock to jump out of the boiling water. Put a frog into boiling water he'll jump out. Gradually increase the temp. of the frog and he boil to death.

Machiavelli Wrote:We have tested Ice sheets core samples back 650,000 years. Never have C02 concentrations been over 300 ppm. Today we are at 375 ppm. We are gaining on avg. 2 ppm every year. When you consider 275 ppm would throws us back into an ice age what will happen when we go over 400 ppm. In the next 50 years we will find out if we don't do something about it. There is BIG MONEY in throwing doubt into this equation. Casting doubt on global warming as a theory. Now in science a theory is well tested and never disprovened. Some people get confused and think of scientific laws vs. theories. Like a theory can one day graduate into a law. Nothing is farther from the truth and big oil and those who doubt evolution have been very effective in planting seeds of doubt in our public's mind. As long as their is DOUBT some people could care less. It's like the frog who needs the sudden shock to jump out of the boiling water. Put a frog into boiling water he'll jump out. Gradually increase the temp. of the frog and he boil to death.

Do you have unbiased links to this? No, that idiotic movie isn't a source.

Hey, Mach -
Snow day today, or proctoring tests?

Graybeard,

Why do you have such a big hard=on about global warming? I agree it BS, but you attack global warming like it just talked about your mama.

global warming --> <-- Graybeard

uhmump95 Wrote:Graybeard,

Why do you have such a big hard=on about global warming? I agree it BS, but you attack global warming like it just talked about your mama.

global warming --> <-- Graybeard

Gee Thanks Mump...I just see something that I think would bring some decent discussion over here and I post it. Just trying to be the stimulative moderator that I am. I posted the poll because I wanted to see how we really lined up. If you listen to the media, you would get the idea that 99% of the country believed in Global Warming, but I didn't think that was true.

For the record, I have started 5 topics today (If I counted correctly) and 2 were about Global warming.

uhmump95 Wrote:Graybeard,

Why do you have such a big hard=on about global warming? I agree it BS, but you attack global warming like it just talked about your mama.

global warming --> <-- Graybeard

I am thinking it has something to do with another "poster" constantly posting about Global Warming destroying us because he watched a movie.

Machiavelli Wrote:We have tested Ice sheets core samples back 650,000 years. Never have C02 concentrations been over 300 ppm. Today we are at 375 ppm. We are gaining on avg. 2 ppm every year. When you consider 275 ppm would throws us back into an ice age what will happen when we go over 400 ppm.

Ok, so we've been over 350 ppm for how long? A few decades? And yet, we have no clear proof of GW.

Quote:In the next 50 years we will find out if we don't do something about it. There is BIG MONEY in throwing doubt into this equation.

There is also big money in perpetuating this notion. Or have you noticed that these scientists aren't living in squalor, and there are big-time lawsuits from "displaced peoples".

Quote:Casting doubt on global warming as a theory. Now in science a theory is well tested and never disprovened. Some people get confused and think of scientific laws vs. theories. Like a theory can one day graduate into a law. Nothing is farther from the truth and big oil and those who doubt evolution have been very effective in planting seeds of doubt in our public's mind.

I might know a little something about scientific theory. First of all, to be an accepted theory, you need to have clear evidence. You also need to have tests. This has not been done w/ GW.

Secondly oh might science teacher, what is being overlooked in your historical data is the difference between causality and correlation. Did low CO2 levels CAUSE ice ages, or do they simply correlate w/ ice ages b/c of another event?
Sure, the mechanism of thermal capture by CO2 is at least a plausible mechanism, but it has not been verified. Low CO2 leading to low temps does not necessarily mean that high CO2 leads to high temps...the whole system is non-linear, and it's not even a reasonable approximation to extrapolate linerarly.

Your sources also IGNORE the UNDISPUTED fact that there has been increased solar output over the time frame associated w/ GW. One letter to the editor described publishing such material as "irresponsible". I find that disturbing that a "scientist" is advocating that scientific observables should be hidden from the public.

The advocates for GW also tend to "cherry pick" the data that supports their thesis. I know this b/c I have seen the data firsthand, and read the primary literature. Have you?

Finally, your sources ignore the fact that even the best models to date are relatively simplistic in their methodologies, and the actual users are less likely to champion these extreme scenarios. I know b/c I had such a conversation w/ someone from NCAR...at an Earth Sciences & Technology Conference.

Quote:As long as their is DOUBT some people could care less.

As long as there is some doubt, people should be shutting up and working harder...not preaching doom and gloom, which ironically they did in the 1970s when they were promising a new ice-age. Oops.

Lib Doggy Dog Wrote:Now in science a theory is well tested and never disprovened.

Really?

Do me a favor then and notify all the scientists out there wasting wads of time and cash trying to prove or disprove the Theory of Relativity, the String Theory, and all the other theories the brainiacs are investigating.

There is plenty of evidence telling us that the earth is currently warming.

Average temperature increases; Glacier recession
Climate change isn't anything new on our planet, but the speed which it seems to be increasing does appear alarming. I don't think there is any reason to panic, but I'm not against attempting to do whatever we can to lower humanity's contribution.

here's an article I found interesting and on topic:
"There is an overwhelming bias today in the media regarding the issue of global warming. In the past two years, this bias has bloomed into an irrational hysteria. Every natural disaster that occurs is now linked with global warming, no matter how tenuous or impossible the connection. As a result, the public has become vastly misinformed."

2 hr. delay- Owl.

Might Science Teacher,

Are you trying to devalue anything I have said. If I have misconstrued or gave any misleading facts please let me know.
Alot of my sources happen to come from NASA Glenn research center. Dr. Czyaskowski form the University of Toledo invited me to a two week long seminar on acquiring Data with Satellites. Alot of the work shop dealt Global Warming. The three prior warming trends are blips on a screen in comparison to the warming trend of the last 50 years. What was of particular interest to me was snow cover in North America. This is one reason we have seen such a dramtic decrease in water levels the last ten years in the Great Lakes. We are not getting the same snow cover as in the past. Of course ground absorbs more light then the reflective property of snow. This is the equalivent of a 60 watt light bulb burning when the sun is shining on every sq. meter of earth. This has to have an effect. In my opinion we will witness a threshold event where a straw will break the camel's back. If the perma frost melts and we release the methane trapped in the Siberian tundra the results of this could be catastrophic. Even talking about this is good. It increases awareness. More work needs to be done, for all of our sakes lets hope I'm wrong. The thermo haline convection current could also have a tremendous impact. This phenomena is what the Day after tommorrow was based on.

Ice core data

Somebody asked for it above. Have fun sorting through it.[/url]

Machiavelli Wrote:2 hr. delay- Owl.

The three prior warming trends are blips on a screen in comparison to the warming trend of the last 50 years.

http://www.junkscience.com/mar06/Time_An...241974.pdf

The warming of the last 50 years huh? Wanna try that again?

The fact is that meteorological data hasn't been kept for long enough to know diddly squat. 100 years of data is a blink in time and we don't know for sure what the core samples really mean.

Quote:100 years of data is a blink in time and we don't know for sure what the core samples really mean.

What do you mean we don't know what the ice core samples really mean. They are a picture of the past and no credible scientist has ever discredited them. The last 50 years are unparelled in their warmth in comparison to the last 650,000 years. The ten hottest years on record have happened since the 90's and 16 of the hottest 20 have happened since the 80's. 2005 was THE HOTTEST year EVER RECORDED!!

Another snow day?

edit: Anyone else find it ironic that Mach cannot work for the paycheck he is collecting because of SNOW, so he fills the idle time with talk of global WARMING? Yes, I know they are not incompatible, but it still seems odd.

OptimisticOwl Wrote:Another snow day?

edit: Anyone else find it ironic that Mach cannot work for the paycheck he is collecting because of SNOW, so he fills the idle time with talk of global WARMING? Yes, I know they are not incompatible, but it still seems odd.

I also SERIOUSLY question his 2005 being the hottest year statement.

RebelKev Wrote:

OptimisticOwl Wrote:Another snow day?

edit: Anyone else find it ironic that Mach cannot work for the paycheck he is collecting because of SNOW, so he fills the idle time with talk of global WARMING? Yes, I know they are not incompatible, but it still seems odd.

I also SERIOUSLY question his 2005 being the hottest year statement.

And his complete and total disregard for the '70's and the looming Ice Age.

linky...........


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con...02498.html


addendum:

great graph on bottom and when you post this vs. the last 650,000 years it isn't even close. There really is no debate in scientific communities that we are getting warmer. Now you can find a couple of people who are funded by big oil to dispute the why.

Giving tests today Owl. Yeah believe it or not. Teacher's do give tests every two weeks. I also have a duty called "Study Hall" monitor for an hour a day. I have internet acces in the libary. So keep to the subject.

Machiavelli Wrote:2005 was THE HOTTEST year EVER RECORDED!!

Your own link doesn't come out and specifically state that it WAS the hottest on record. "On record" being the key words.

Do you know how long they've been keeping these records, Dogger? Not long. Think about the numerous ice ages this world has gone through. SOMETHING had to melt the ice....and it wasn't sillyass women in SUVs.

The article was written in Oct. of that year. It ended up being the hottest one recorded. Just google warmest years on record. I could link hundreds of articles.

literally three second search.........

http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/environ...rmest.html

Machiavelli Wrote:literally three second search.........

http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/environ...rmest.html

...and again, how long have temps been recorded? It would appear only since the 1800's. Now, do you think the world is 6000 years old? Or a LOOOOOOOOOT older as I do? .....because that is not enough data to start going apeshit over.

Read Grey Beard's link. It's good. We have ice core data that goes back 650,000 years. I will highlight the areas tommorrow if you don't understand how they get the temp. and the composition of CO2. The temperature can be found using the isotopes of Oxygen. They tell how they do it in GB's article. The actual CO2 can be found in the gas bubbles. It really isn't controversial.

Machiavelli Wrote:Read Grey Beard's link. It's good. We have ice core data that goes back 650,000 years. I will highlight the areas tommorrow if you don't understand how they get the temp. and the composition of CO2. The temperature can be found using the isotopes of Oxygen. They tell how they do it in GB's article. The actual CO2 can be found in the gas bubbles. It really isn't controversial.

...and I'd be willing to bet that those ice core samples can't accurately deduct 5 degree variations over a period of millions of years. We're only talking about a few degrees of separation here.

...and I'd be willing to bet


and you would lose.

It really isn't as controversial as you are making it. It's how they date rocks. Potassium Argon, C14 vs. C12. It's not debatable to credicle scientists. I have an article I'm going to post about the attck on Scientists. I got it from the National Reviews Corner. Many on their are concerned about the influence of the religious right o their cause. It was in the theme of the Liberalterians. Why have you lost your faith in our scientists? Do you realize we tied with Turkey with our populations belief in evolution. Japan and the European communities score in the 80 percentile. Americans are stuck in the 50's because of the religious right. Francis Collins was on the Colbert Report last night. He was talking about these very same issues. Many in our country have lost faith in our scientists and I don't understand it. I'll post it over the wekend. Interesting read.... from a Conservative site.

another interesting thought according to a Dr. Wang at BGSU. This was in my undergrad years, but he said it would only take a loss of 1.5 degrees celsius on our annual budget to throw us back into an ice age. I'll never forget that. Climatology 313 with Dr. Wang. We met Thursday nights from 6-9. I loved that class.

Machiavelli Wrote:literally three second search.........

http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/environ...rmest.html

Dude,your own link says, "hottest in over a century".

http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/environ...rmest.html

What the hell does that tell you? How you can gather, "Hottest on record" from that, and think it means of all time, is beyond me.

RebelKev Wrote:

Machiavelli Wrote:literally three second search.........

http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/environ...rmest.html

Dude,your own link says, "hottest in over a century".

http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/environ...rmest.html

What the hell does that tell you? How you can gather, "Hottest on record" from that, and think it means of all time, is beyond me.

Also from his link:

Quote:Because these areas are remote and far away from major cities, it is clear to climatologists that the warming is not due to the influence of pollution from urban areas.

Machiavelli Wrote:Giving tests today Owl. Yeah believe it or not. Teacher's do give tests every two weeks. I also have a duty called "Study Hall" monitor for an hour a day. I have internet acces in the libary. So keep to the subject.

I guess things have changed since I was on the school board. We expected our teachers to do what they were paid to do, whether that be lecturing, giving tests, or monitoring study halls. Certainly there is a little leeway for taking care of personal things during the day, but spending hours in a internet debate wouldn't be one of them. If you were to teach your students the meaning of 'dereliction of duty", how would you define it? Are you just bored with your job?

You have internet access in the library, so you are using school property. I also wonder, how are you monitoring the Study hall if you are in the library? If the Study Hall in the library?

I'm using the ice core temperatures. THe one's that went back 650,000 years as my data set. The one's your complaining about.

Another thing there have been thousands of articles in peer reviewed scientific journals. They sampled 928 of these articles and do you know the number of scientists in these articles that disagreed with the general consensus that there is global warming and human's are the cause of it.

Zero .... zero scientists



Now a leaked internal memo showed how big oil tries to "Reposition Global Warming as Theory rather than Fact"

This has happened before after a Surgeon's general report that smoking lead to cancers. The Tobacco lobby took out a huge marketing campaign on how Doctors preferred certain brands. Cast Doubt..... Doubt is our friend


Now they have sampled 636 articles in the popular press and over 53% of these articles cast doubt onto what is the cause of global warming.

There really is no debate in the scientific community as to what causes global warming. The chief of staff of the EPA Phillip Cooney was caught editing a scientific memo from NASA. He had no scientific training and prior to his appointment he worked for the American Petroleum Institute (Oil And Gas Lobby). This man took it upon himself to edit a scientific journal of which he had no business in doing about the dangers of global warming and what is causing it. He had to resign three days after this came to light. The next Day he was hired by Exxon Mobil.

This is kind of like Cheney's energy task force that shaped W's energy policy. We'll subpoena that in the 110th congress to see what happened there. Cheney refuses to this day to release his notes.



"It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding of it" Upton Sinclair

Quote:They sampled 928 of these articles and do you know the number of scientists in these articles that disagreed with the general consensus that there is global warming and human's are the cause of it.

Zero .... zero scientists

So, once again you start a rant about how evil humans and Capitalism are the cause of Global Warming. So again, one more F'N TIME, I ask:

Why are the ice caps melting on Mars?

How many Ice Ages has the world gone through?

What caused the ice to melt, when humans weren't even around?

This is why I don't argue with fools that think Capitalism is the root cause of global warming. You people have made it political and want no f'n intelligent debate on the matter unless it's a consensus on how great Socialism is.

Quote:I guess things have changed since I was on the school board

I bet you were a jewel in that capacity. Bet they didn't have the information super highway back then huh. Yeah it is easy to do. Again I can walk and chew gum. Right now, I'm not in school. I also post at night. Right now I'm actually teaching about Global Warming. It's a part of our standards. I bet I could even have my union president argue that what I am doing here, even during school time would be relevant. I could just print out this entire thread and have my kids discuss it. I'm even going to have them watch an Inconvient Truth and do a paper over it. And when they don't agree with me I'm going to lower their grade............................................... I joke... I joke. Usually the kids who do their own research and try to find their own meaning are the most intelligent ones. So even having this discussion raises awareness, to which I am thankful. Thankful during this Holiday Season. Oh wait with the war on Christmas, Thankful during this Christmas Season.


Owl,

I mean this, I'm being sincere. Your an intelligent man and I like your posts, but in today's educational system it's not really hard to do what I am doing. Especially during Study Halls. I also have a conference. I don't take lunches so that's an extra hour there. It may seem to you that I'm posting on here too much during the school day, but it truly is a part of my curriculum. Especially Global Warming. Now we've had two of these conversations and it's no problem on my end. I've already graded the tests I gave today. Tuesday is our next testing day. Monday, Wed, and Friday I won't be able to post 1,2,3, 5 or 7th periods. The other times I can post at any time, not a problem. Conference, lunch and two Study Halls. Life is good with my schedule. Some teacher's have it better some have it worse. I'm top guy in seniority in my department, so I pretty much pick the classes I want to teach. It's great. Have a good one.

[/quote]So, once again you start a rant about how evil humans and Capitalism are the cause of Global Warming. So again, one more F'N TIME, I ask:

Why are the ice caps melting on Mars?

Quote:Don't know.... Don't care.. don't plan on living on Mar's anytime soon. More concerned about here.

[quote]How many Ice Ages has the world gone through?

I think 7 in the last 650,000 years. Not sure about that. With a little research I could give you the answer. Why?

Quote:What caused the ice to melt, when humans weren't even around?

Natural cycles. The amount of CO2 we are putting into the atmosphere is not natural. Hence, the worry about global warming.

You know, I always answer your questions reb, You've done this a couple of times saying I don't answer your questions. Relax