OT: Global Warming - Real or Contrived?

[EZSnappin]

I live in Southern Maine and we only dropeed to maybe -25 or so. No biggie!

[Feanor]

I really have nothing of value to add to discussion of global warming, I just really wanted to quote this line ;

Angry survivors blame council 'green' policy

"We've lost two people in my family because you dickheads won't cut trees down," he said. "We wanted trees cut down on the side of the road … and you can't even cut the grass for God's sake."

It's a funny line, but the Aussie fires are heartbreakingly sad.

[XXXIV]

My feet are cold as we speak.

[Rodster]

I really have nothing of value to add to discussion of global warming, I just really wanted to quote this line ;

Angry survivors blame council 'green' policy

"We've lost two people in my family because you dickheads won't cut trees down," he said. "We wanted trees cut down on the side of the road … and you can't even cut the grass for God's sake."

It's a funny line, but the Aussie fires are heartbreakingly sad.

And it's even more sad when you have diaper wearing Islamic wack job's calling for a fire burning jihad in Australia. And you wonder why the world loves Islam?

[bdoughty]

Hamburgers are the Hummers of food in global warming

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id ... _article=1

When it comes to global warming, hamburgers are the Hummers of food, scientists say.

Simply switching from steak to salad could cut as much carbon as leaving the car at home a couple days a week.

That's because beef is such an incredibly inefficient food to produce and cows release so much harmful methane into the atmosphere, said Nathan Pelletier of Dalhousie University in Canada.


If people were to simply switch from beef to chicken, emissions would be cut by 70 percent, Pelletier said.


"Switching to no red meat and no dairy products is the equivalent of (cutting out) 8,100 miles driven in a car ... that gets 25 miles to the gallon," Weber said in an interview following the symposium.

Buying local meat and produce will not have nearly the same effect, he cautioned.

That's because only five percent of the emissions related to food come from transporting food to market.

"You can have a much bigger impact by shifting just one day a week from meat and dairy to anything else than going local every day of the year," Weber said.

For more information on how to eat a low carbon diet, visit www.eatlowcarbon.org

-------------------

* As I am posting this I am currently eating two slices of cold 5-meat pizza from Pizza Hut.

[Teal]

And all this time I thought 'low-carb' meant something else...

[bdoughty]

And all this time I thought 'low-carb' meant something else...

Go to that site and see how your lunch will destroy the planet. You get to drop food items in a skillet and everything. Three bean burritos cause the planet to turn red. I am actually amazed the site does not allow for me to offset my planet poor diet with some carbon credits. I am sure it is planned.

[matthewk]

That's because of the huge amount of methane gas given off AFTER the bean burritos are consumed.

I'm still waiting for them to tell us the amount of carbon emissions we could prevent if we just whacked someone.

[JackB1]

Hamburgers are the Hummers of food in global warming

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id ... _article=1

When it comes to global warming, hamburgers are the Hummers of food, scientists say.

Simply switching from steak to salad could cut as much carbon as leaving the car at home a couple days a week.

That's because beef is such an incredibly inefficient food to produce and cows release so much harmful methane into the atmosphere, said Nathan Pelletier of Dalhousie University in Canada.

Could you imagine how much carbon emmisions we could cut if we just closed down McDonalds, BK & Wendy's? Whow would have known Ronald McDonald was the "Anti-Gore"?

[bdoughty]

Could you imagine how much carbon emmisions we could cut if we just closed down McDonalds, BK & Wendy's? Whow would have known Ronald McDonald was the "Anti-Gore"?

Imagine the carbon emission drops if Al Gore stopped eating at McDonalds, BK & Wendys. This is not the physique of a man who eats a lot of green.

[bdoughty]

Boy oh boy, the greenies will not be too happy with the Doughty clan. We found a bunch of our neighbors cattle that broke through the electric fence and started munching down on our winter wheat. The ozone may never forgive us.


One of them kept staring at me the whole time. I just had to name him and with a black marker I scribbled a little something on the back of his pink tag.





Personally I think that it is much better than having a star named after you.

[RobVarak]

In a perfect universe studies like this would be the first nail in the coffin of the Great Biofuel Boondoggle. Not likely given the power of Big Corn, but still...one can dream.

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/02/18 ... up-global/

[bdoughty]

Note to self: Do not plant corn.

[Naples39]

Note to self: Do not plant corn.

More like, "note to self: do not cut down rainforest to plant corn."

[Teal]

heh...

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid= ... e9swvOqwIY

[davet010]

Interesting - there's an error, but it doesn't change the fact that the polar cap is retreating.

I take it that this was what amused you ?

[Teal]

Interesting - there's an error, but it doesn't change the fact that the polar cap is retreating.

I take it that this was what amused you ?

Well...YEAH! I mean, we get the 'THE SKY IS FALLING! THE EARTH IS WARMING! THE ICE CAPS ARE SHRINKING!' stuff ad nauseum, based upon 'scientific evidence', and then said 'scientific evidence' is so wrong it misplaces a swath of polar ice the SIZE OF CALIFORNIA?!?

What's not to be amused by?????

[Jared]

Well...YEAH! I mean, we get the 'THE SKY IS FALLING! THE EARTH IS WARMING! THE ICE CAPS ARE SHRINKING!' stuff ad nauseum, based upon 'scientific evidence', and then said 'scientific evidence' is so wrong it misplaces a swath of polar ice the SIZE OF CALIFORNIA?!?

What's not to be amused by?????

The article's contents actually demonstrate that the scientific evidence for the size of the ice cap has checks to make sure that the evidence is as good as possible, and the article is reporting that one of these checks worked. Furthermore, the claims you're making in CAPS wouldn't even be based on the mistaken data you're referring to, as it is preliminary and before any quality checks. From the article you linked to:

The error, due to a problem called “sensor drift,” began in early January and caused a slowly growing underestimation of sea ice extent until mid-February. That’s when “puzzled readers” alerted the NSIDC about data showing ice-covered areas as stretches of open ocean, the Boulder, Colorado-based group said on its Web site.

“Sensor drift, although infrequent, does occasionally occur and it is one of the things that we account for during quality- control measures prior to archiving the data,” the center said. “Although we believe that data prior to early January are reliable, we will conduct a full quality check.’’

The extent of Arctic sea ice is seen as a key measure of how rising temperatures are affecting the Earth. The cap retreated in 2007 to its lowest extent ever and last year posted its second- lowest annual minimum at the end of the yearly melt season. The recent error doesn’t change findings that Arctic ice is retreating, the NSIDC said.

The center said real-time data on sea ice is always less reliable than archived numbers because full checks haven’t yet been carried out. Historical data is checked across other sources, it said.

Basically, the article shows that measures of ice caps have checks to come up with a reliable measure, and that the Arctic ice cap in 2007 was at its lowest recorded extent. It actually refutes your point pretty clearly.

[Teal]

That'd be nice and all, if it weren't totally reversed in 2008...

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/02/03/a ... cord-rate/

Who knows, maybe a mirror was out of place, or the smoke machine went on the fritz for a bit last year...could be, I suppose...

[Jared]

? From the article you posted:

Certainly the 30 year arctic trend in ice area is downward...

There's nothing in that post that says that the loss in sea ice was totally reversed in 2008 (feel free to post if there is something I missed). What I think he's saying is that, using daily data, the maximum growth in sea ice (which looks to be over winters) was over the past few years.

And that makes total sense, especially if there is less Arctic ice. If you have more open water over time, you're going to get more area over where a seasonal icing could happen. Because of that, when winter comes and there is more open water that can be frozen, you will get increased peaks in winter freezing. It's why his metric isn't a valid one for looking at the condition of the Arctic ice cap.

[Teal]

I think the bottom line is that, whether there's any of the 'science' that can be hailed as universally valid and undeniable or not, it's seasonal. It simply has nothing to do with human intervention. The ice caps haven't always been there, and it's unreasonable to conclude they always will be. We didn't put the ice caps there, and we won't take them away. To think so requires a level of arrogance that I simply don't possess.

I just think it's hilarious that they misplaced a section of the ice the size of California. That's a pretty damned big blunder, and should be a HUGE black spot on an already scarred landscape, but sadly, for some, the religion is more important than reason.

[GTHobbes]

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/03 ... index.html

"Hundreds of leading scientists warned Thursday that global warming is accelerating beyond the worst predictions and threatening to trigger "irreversible" climate shifts on the planet.

Saying there's no excuse for inaction, the nearly 2,000 climate researchers meeting in Copenhagen urged policy-makers to "vigorously" implement the economic and technological tools available to cut emissions of heat-trapping greenhouse gases.

Their stark message came at the end of a three-day conference aimed at updating the findings of a 2007 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change before U.N. talks in December on a new global climate treaty."

http://www.stopglobalwarming.org/sgw_re ... 7043122009

[fsquid]

It snowed here in March. Take that global warming stuff and shove it.

[XXXIV]

It snowed here in March. Take that global warming stuff and shove it.

Here Here!!! Bravo sir!

[Teal]

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/europe/03 ... index.html

"Hundreds of leading scientists warned Thursday that global warming is accelerating beyond the worst predictions and threatening to trigger "irreversible" climate shifts on the planet.

Saying there's no excuse for inaction, the nearly 2,000 climate researchers meeting in Copenhagen urged policy-makers to "vigorously" implement the economic and technological tools available to cut emissions of heat-trapping greenhouse gases.

Their stark message came at the end of a three-day conference aimed at updating the findings of a 2007 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change before U.N. talks in December on a new global climate treaty."

http://www.stopglobalwarming.org/sgw_re ... 7043122009