Global Warming Debate ll

[ZenGum]

Note to self: plagiarize new Scientist before writing long posts.

This links to the New Scientist home page.

This links to their "Climate Change" special report, a collection of all the stories they have relevant to climate change. Some are good news - a new carbon binding crop, eg.. A few dispute the reality and anthropogenicity of climate change. The vast majority are not good news, and do not dispute this.

This links to the "Instant Expert" article found on that page. The original is better than this copy because every claim has a link which supports it.

Here are some highlights of that article:

Climate change is with us. A decade ago, it was conjecture. Now the future is unfolding before our eyes.

SNIP

Scientists see it in tree rings, ancient coral and bubbles trapped in ice cores. These reveal that the world has not been as warm as it is now for a millennium or more. The three warmest years on record have all occurred since 1998; 19 of the warmest 20 since 1980. And Earth has probably never warmed as fast as in the past 30 years - a period when natural influences on global temperatures, such as solar cycles and volcanoes should have cooled us down. Studies of the thermal inertia of the oceans suggest that there is more warming in the pipeline.

Climatologists reporting for the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) say we are seeing global warming caused by human activities and there are growing fears of feedbacks that will accelerate this warming.

SNIP


If current trends continue, we will raise atmospheric CO2 concentrations to double pre-industrial levels during this century. That will probably be enough to raise global temperatures by around 2°C to 5°C. Some warming is certain, but the degree will be determined by feedbacks involving melting ice, the oceans, water vapour, clouds and changes to vegetation.

SNIP

As natural ecosystems - such as coral reefs - are disrupted, biodiversity is reduced. Most species cannot migrate fast enough to keep up, though others are already evolving in response to warming.

Thermal expansion of the oceans, combined with melting ice on land, is also raising sea levels. In this century, human activity could trigger an irreversible melting of the Greenland ice sheet and Antarctic glaciers. This would condemn the world to a rise in sea level of six metres - enough to flood land occupied by billions of people.

SNIP

The bottom line is that we will need to cut CO2 emissions by 70% to 80% simply to stabilise atmospheric CO2 concentrations - and thus temperatures. The quicker we do that, the less unbearably hot our future

Only thing I'd change is that last paragraph: "We will need to" should read "We need to".

[classicman]

Well we need to invest in watercraft then, cuz we'll all be living in a "waterworld"

[Aliantha]

What I want to know is; if our atmostphere is supposedly 'trapping' all these CO2 emissions and that's what's causing all this warming, why doesn't it all just 'escape' out of the hole in the ozone layer?

Surely if you take these two arguments together it points to one or the other being false?

Then again, I'm not a scientist. That's just a thought I've had.

[Happy Monkey]

CO2 isn't trying to get out, and ozone wouldn't stop it if it were.

[Aliantha]

yes, but it's the CO2 build up that stops the suns rays from escaping (apparently). If there's a hole, why can't the CO2 get out there?

Let's polute space before anyone else does!

[Happy Monkey]

If CO2 had any inclination to escape (which, being heavy, it doesn't), it would go straight through the ozone layer, with or without the hole.

[Aliantha]

maybe they should just design a big cooling vent in the atmosphere then. put in a few big rotors and suck all that nasty carbon gas out.

[lookout123]

Here is something that I stumbled upon that I found amusing and interesting. Some nerdy science teacher has created a clever and mildly amusing approach to discussing global warming. It's nearly 10 minutes but hey, let's face it - you're just waiting for an update in Labrat's ass thread anyway.

[Aliantha]

I've seen that one before. It's an interesting perspective. What do you think lookout?

[lookout123]

My view? I think that I don't know enough to present my views in any sort of authoritative way. My feeling is that we humans are harming the planet around us. I don't think it takes a genius to see that. Pollution and environmental damage are undeniable. The problem for me is what do we do about it?

Politicians have grabbed the issue because it is an easy subject to grab attention with. Industry is taking advantage of our limited knowledge and immense gullibility. I haven't bothered to look into it myself, but most things I've seen and heard seem to support the idea that the "green" products do in fact use less energy, but have other side effects that offset any real benefit.

So I will do what I try to do with most issues, take care of what I can see right around me. I turn the lights off when leaving the room. I try not to waste gas and electricity. I try to take care of my environment. Probably all meaningless gestures, but they feel like the right thing to do. I for damn sure will not buy carbon offsets from that douchebag Al Gore.

[classicman]

Wasn't there someone selling carbon credits here? I think I bought one too. hmmm - hafta look at my checkbook to see if I paid....

[TheMercenary]

I think we should just blame it all on Bush and his conspiratorial relationship with the Saudi government, oh that and The Illuminati.

[xoxoxoBruce]

That was never in doubt, but what can we do about it?

[Radar]

There is no global warming debate. Global warming is a fact and it is recognized among all credible climatologists. Those who deny global warming is real and that it is directly connected to the pollution created by industrialized nations are liars, idiots, or have something political or financial to gain from such lies.

[classicman]

It the cows I tell ya, the cows!