One of the news stories today is that the rise in teperatures due to global warming has caused the amount and strength of hurricanes to increase. Equally as prevalent are those who will argue the other side. However, for the life of me I cannot understand how either can make a definitive determination on the issue since one of the articles I read compares today's hurricane season to the low cycle of the 70's and completely ignores this fact. "The last major peak in hurricane activity occurred between 1940 and 1970." Beyond that, I'm finding that while most anti-global warming advocates will continue to push the idea that they don't feel that it has been caused by global warming, at the very least they'll add the caveat that "the data isn't there to support either claim".
And just from a layman's standpoint, there are an assload of factors that cause a hurricane to become a higher category and not just fall apart, and even more factors that cause the thing to hit the US or head out into the atlantic. Can lack of wind-shear, which decapitates a hurricane preventing it from gaining strength, and protective high pressure systems which will stear the thing away from the US really be caused by an increase in ocean temps? I'm a huge fan of knowing all or at the very least most of the facts before I go running around trying to prove my POV. I'm a little disappointed that sectors of the atmospheric science community has at the very least glazed over some things to prove what I can only justify as a political point, because I just don't see the science to back the claim up. Any thoughts?
_________________ "...there is no limit to what a man can do or where he can go if he doesn't mind who gets the credit."
--Ronald Reagan
Joined: Mon 09-01-2003 6:23PM Posts: 2880 Location: Either at the source below, or in 859 TJ south
Source: TJ South
I heard on one report on TWS about this, is that they go in about 40 year cycles of getting stronger and more frequent, then dying off, which would sync up with the global warming trend since the '70's.
In my opinion, global warming bad, and will cause some large scale ecological disasters. Until corporations start trying to seriously deal with it, there's nothing the rest of us can do but buck up and try to survive.
_________________ The nicest asshole you probably wish you had never met.
Remember, Jesus loves you...but he doesn't put out.
...The effects of climate change are already being felt. The devastating floods, droughts and storms we have seen across the world in recent years show all too clearly how vulnerable we are to climate extremes and how high the economic, human and environmental costs can be, particularly in developing countries...
And another from this pdf signed by science academies of the 8 nations, including the appointed chair of the academy by the bush administration...
Quote:
...Increasing temperatures are likely to increase the frequency and severity of weather events such as heat waves and heavy rainfall...
Interpret this as you wish... I know how I will, the pdf even predicts a calamity that could happen in bangladesh. Either there is global warming caused by humans, or there isn't. Most countries agree there is. As for the affects of global warming... Those have been foretold the best they can be, AFTER considering all the factors at work.
As for the 40 yr. cycle you guys are talking about, common sense tells me that cycle has changed for the worse in the last 10 years. I'm too lazy too look up scientific papers, which we'd end up arguing anyway, hopefully this is convincing enough.
edit: you'll want to read the "Notes and references" (highlighted blue section) in the middle of the second page of pdf for some basic info.
problem is.. we don't have the data about hurricanes that we do now going back in the years.. so its hard to know comparitively how bad they would be getting and if "global warming" is part of it. It's all up in the air, many views hold that we are coming out of a minature ice age.
Joined: Sun 08-15-2004 9:36PM Posts: 4957 Location: ~~~~\o/~~~~~
Source: TJ South
its just for politicians or political groups to grab a spotlight when theres nothing else going on. or in this case, something to blame for all the weather we have been having.
Some basics, from the pdf... "We use the UNFCCC definition of climate change, which is: a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to natural climate variability observed over comparable time periods"
so... the quote again:
Quote:
...The effects of climate change are already being felt. The devastating floods, droughts and storms we have seen across the world in recent years show all too clearly how vulnerable we are to climate extremes and how high the economic, human and environmental costs can be, particularly in developing countries...
Here's the policy issues page of the G8 summit. It has all the latest on Climate change, and what countries think of it.
wow... just wow... the disconnect between what you guys said and the rest of the world is amazing. even republicans have pretty consistently admitted to there being climate change, they just didn't want to do anything about it (like cut emissions) because it would hurt growth in the economy. you guys are just being a bunch of extremists... i'm not sure yet how that compares with blind republicans...
Bullshit, by penn and teller? which episode was about global warming?
Joined: Mon 11-17-2003 12:27AM Posts: 3128 Location: The Bat Cave
Source: Fidelity
Global Warming does not have to be caused by humans. And with the absence of detailed weather patterns in past centuries, it is diifucult to tell whether this is a trend, or actually a crisis arising from industrial pollution.
_________________ Carney Institute of Technology
Why not outlaw MURDER instead of trying to outlaw guns?
Global warming has been happening ever since we have been observing it. The average temperature rises, then it goes back down suddenly and continues the cycle. The obvious disconnect behind you and science is amazing...
_________________ My girlfriend went to London and all I got was this lousy sig.
Some basics, from the pdf... "We use the UNFCCC definition of climate change, which is: a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to natural climate variability observed over comparable time periods"
so... the quote again:
Quote:
...The effects of climate change are already being felt. The devastating floods, droughts and storms we have seen across the world in recent years show all too clearly how vulnerable we are to climate extremes and how high the economic, human and environmental costs can be, particularly in developing countries...
Here's the policy issues page of the G8 summit. It has all the latest on Climate change, and what countries think of it.
wow... just wow... the disconnect between what you guys said and the rest of the world is amazing. even republicans have pretty consistently admitted to there being climate change, they just didn't want to do anything about it (like cut emissions) because it would hurt growth in the economy. you guys are just being a bunch of extremists... i'm not sure yet how that compares with blind republicans...
Bullshit, by penn and teller? which episode was about global warming?
Anyone else notice how his quote is meaningless and merely seem to prove a point?
"The effects of climate change are already being felt. The devastating floods, droughts and storms we have seen across the world in recent years show all too clearly how vulnerable we are to climate extremes and how high the economic, human and environmental costs can be, particularly in developing countries..."
There are many scientists who think that this natural warming and subsequent cooling of the earth has gone on since the very beginning, and while most will agree that our CO2 Emissions have hastened the warming, there is no hard evidence that this hasn't happened before. You're using a supposed effect to determine a supposed cause. Where's the hard science in that? Show me a consensus that determined that global warming, is wholly caused by humans, AND is the sole cause for the current natural disasters the world is experiencing. There is no direct link to any of this. I am not soo naieve as to think that our CO2 emissions haven't sped up the process of global warming, but to say that the global warming started by humans caused Katrina, or the tsunami is a scientific leap of faith over a large crevasse.
_________________ "...there is no limit to what a man can do or where he can go if he doesn't mind who gets the credit."
--Ronald Reagan
"We use the UNFCCC definition of climate change, which is: a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to natural climate variability observed over comparable time periods"
Quote:
"There will always be uncertainty in understanding a system as complex as the world’s climate. However there is now strong evidence that significant global warming is occurring1. The evidence comes from direct measurements of rising surface air temperatures and subsurface ocean temperatures and from phenomena such as increases in average global sea levels, retreating glaciers, and changes to many physical and biological systems. It is likely that most of the warming in recent decades can be attributed to human activities (IPCC 2001)2. This warming has already led to changes in the Earth's climate." ... "The scientific understanding of climate change is now sufficiently clear to justify nations taking prompt action. It is vital that all nations identify cost-effective steps that they can take now, to contribute to substantial and long-term reduction in net global greenhouse gas emissions.
Action taken now to reduce significantly the build-up of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere will lessen the magnitude and rate of climate change. As the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) recognises, a lack of full scientific certainty about some aspects of climate change is not a reason for delaying an immediate response that will, at a reasonable cost, prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system." ... "The projected changes in climate will have both beneficial and adverse effects at the regional level, for example on water resources, agriculture, natural ecosystems and human health. The larger and faster the changes in climate, the more likely it is that adverse effects will dominate. increasing temperatures are likely to increase the frequency and severity of weather events such as heat waves and heavy rainfall. Increasing temperatures could lead to large-scale effects such as melting of large ice sheets (with major impacts on low-lying regions throughout the world)."
These statements were agreed upon in 2005 AFTER considering all the complexities of climate change. What you guys are saying has been said for a really long time now, since the kyoto protocol. and the pdf is the most recent summarization and agreement of all research done so far. So, your statements have been disproved by what the eight national science acadamies said at the last G8 summit.
I guess it requires a speech from bush to convince the blind since they can't see much beyond well, what bush says.
Joined: Mon 11-17-2003 12:27AM Posts: 3128 Location: The Bat Cave
Source: Fidelity
How did they prove anything you dipshit. They speculated, there is no way that the human mind, no matter how smart the person is, could consider all of the complexities of climate change. You have to be the stupidest person ever to think that they covered everything. It is simply not possible. Just because some people with impressive titles in front of their names, say something doesn't mean it is true. How come these guys can't predict huricanes and tornados, something relatively common, if they can consider every complexity of something we have never experienced. I guess predicting something that can be definatley disproved, such as a tornado will hit Rolla in 38.25551 hours, is way more diffucult than analyzing something that has never happened.
_________________ Carney Institute of Technology
Why not outlaw MURDER instead of trying to outlaw guns?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
