Is The Sun Causing The Current Climate Change?

[jeb]

Nice out of context quote there, Jeb. You do know, of course, that they were talking about the state of climate science in the 1970s, more than 40 years ago, when they said that.

Out of context? It was totally in context. The only debate is if the accuracy of the science has changed since then. Given the results thus far of the latest and greatest from that branch of science, the answer is clearly that they are still just guessing.

Also, if you weren't as invested in your own evangelism, you might just see some possible validity in the reasons they gave for the current "hiatus" in warming and why it doesn't prove the models wrong. Obviously there is no use arguing with you about it because your mind has long been made up, but maybe some others on here would like to read this.

That goes both ways. You can't see the obvious because you're so invested in your believes.

And that is kind of the rub. If neither side can prove their theories correct, what are we doing talking about saving the world from some boogie man that likely does not even exist?

I do agree with you that it would be stupid (and it isn't going to happen) that we further damage our economy with draconian measures while the rest of the world goes on with business as usual.

You're wrong about that. Things like Obama's EPA recently declaring war on fossil fuel power is doing tremendous damage to our economy in many ways. Loss of jobs, more folks on the govt teat, higher cost of power making us less competitive globally, scaring off investments, etc. The folks that do those kinds of things to our economy say "well, it's just a little more money, the consumer will suck it up.". That's just not the case anymore. We have to compete on a world wide basis, which means companies have to move jobs overseas in order to still be profitable when faced with ever increasing regulation and cost.

Thing is, there are positive ways to go about reducing our CO2 footprint and have the rest of the world follow along.

Like what, specifically? And exactly how much will your ideas cost and exactly how will they actually help? Remember, the very draconian restrictions in the Kyoto treaty were said to only be able to bring down the global warming by like 1/2 a degree over the next century. This is not a turn the extra lights off kind of problem, if you listen to the alarmist. This is a get off the grid completely kind of problem. How many here are ready to unplug?

China, the biggest problem, is realizing they have a problem and beginning to figure out how to reduce it, and we could be leading the way with technology to do so instead of kicking and screaming about changing the ways we produce energy.

You're fooling yourself if you think China is going to follow anyones lead. They are laughing at us as they suck ever more jobs and money away from us. As I said earlier, they only thing China will pay attention to is if we pull jobs away from them. And the only way that is going to happen is to make it easier for companies to produce goods in the developed countries. Instead, we throw up ever more road blocks for companies to be able to do that. And that's a darn shame.

I don't doubt they will gradually start to adopt some meager pollution controls, especially in the larger industrialized areas. I understand the jobs our govt has shipped them have caused untold pollution issues. But they'd only do as little as required, and probably only if we pay for it. Did you see their demands at the latest UN conference last week? Go look them up and tell me they aren't just laughing at us. They'll only change, they said, if someone else pays for it. And they want a reliable, govt imposed, dedicated tax stream from the developed countries before they'll agree to it.

Look, I'm all for trying to find a better way and energy that pollutes less. But first and foremost, it has to make sense. We've already done a tremendous job of cleaning up the environment in the States, as most developed countries have. But we have to stay competitive, too. We can't just decide that we're going to pay twice as much or more for our energy because we feel better about it and expect to have any kind of thriving economy left.

[Mark]

And thus, we will continue down the same road.

[Fly_Guy]

When Trav was on this forum, he used to have a picture of a dead horse...

[Jerry Rapp]

snopes verifies that is a true article...........J Rapp

The Washington Post: (Only 8 sentences. Read to the end!!)


The Arctic Ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot, according to a report to the Commerce Department yesterday from Consulafft, at Bergen , Norway ..

Reports from fishermen, seal hunters, and explorers all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes.

Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters showed the gulf stream still very warm.
Great masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of earth and stones, the report continued, while at many points well known glaciers have entirely disappeared.

Very few seals and no white fish are found in the eastern Arctic, while vast shoals of herring and smelts which have never before ventured so far north, are being encountered in the old seal fishing grounds. Within a few years it is predicted that due to the ice melt the sea will rise and make most coastal cities uninhabitable.
* * * * * * * * *
I apologize, I neglected to mention that this report was from November 2, 1922,
As reported by the AP and published in The Washington Post - 89 years ago.

[Al Agnew]

snopes verifies that is a true article...........J Rapp

The Washington Post: (Only 8 sentences. Read to the end!!)

The Arctic Ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot, according to a report to the Commerce Department yesterday from Consulafft, at Bergen , Norway ..

Reports from fishermen, seal hunters, and explorers all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes.

Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters showed the gulf stream still very warm.

Great masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of earth and stones, the report continued, while at many points well known glaciers have entirely disappeared.

Very few seals and no white fish are found in the eastern Arctic, while vast shoals of herring and smelts which have never before ventured so far north, are being encountered in the old seal fishing grounds. Within a few years it is predicted that due to the ice melt the sea will rise and make most coastal cities uninhabitable.

* * * * * * * * *

I apologize, I neglected to mention that this report was from November 2, 1922,

As reported by the AP and published in The Washington Post - 89 years ago.

Of course, Jerry, if you read the whole Snopes article and followed the link near the bottom and read it, you would have noticed that the 1922 news report was based upon local conditions in the Spitzbergen region, and that the data from long-established stations all over the Arctic showed no exceptional Arctic-wide warming or shrinking ice cover in 1922. And the same stations have showed a long term warming trend of the entire Arctic, which has accelerated since the 1970s.

[Justin Spencer]

Jerry needs his own show on Fox "news" called the Spin Zone.

[Flysmallie]

Not much "we" can do.

Or more importantly, there is not much that we WOULD be willing to do.

Not going to argue if the science is right or not. But if it is there is plenty that we could do. Just not going to be a popular or profitable thing, so we won't.

[Quillback]

I don't think it has anything to do with popularity, profits for sure. Or economics and providing electricity, food and transportation to the worlds population.

Here's what the folks at MIT are predicting:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/02/mit-energy-report_n_5923372.html

[jeb]

So much for the deep ocean warming theory. Yes, they try to dance around it a bit, but it's hard to dispute the results are not in the favor the "consensus scientist" community on this one:

http://www.nasa.gov/press/2014/october/nasa-study-finds-earth-s-ocean-abyss-has-not-warmed/#.VDUklxYym1l

The cold waters of Earth’s deep ocean have not warmed measurably since 2005, according to a new NASA study, leaving unsolved the mystery of why global warming appears to have slowed in recent years.

The temperature of the top half of the world's oceans -- above the 1.24-mile mark -- is still climbing, but not fast enough to account for the stalled air temperatures.

[ozark trout fisher]

So much for the deep ocean warming theory. Yes, they try to dance around it a bit, but it's hard to dispute the results are not in the favor the "consensus scientist" community on this one:

http://www.nasa.gov/press/2014/october/nasa-study-finds-earth-s-ocean-abyss-has-not-warmed/#.VDUklxYym1l

The cold waters of Earth’s deep ocean have not warmed measurably since 2005, according to a new NASA study, leaving unsolved the mystery of why global warming appears to have slowed in recent years.

The temperature of the top half of the world's oceans -- above the 1.24-mile mark -- is still climbing, but not fast enough to account for the stalled air temperatures.

Just a question: Do you understand what a "trend" is? Specifically, that it doesn't indicate that temperature will be rising constantly, and linearly, without any pauses. Climate change has been occuring, in its current, anthropogenic form, for approximately 150 years. Things evening out a bit over a tiny portion of that time period does not mean the trend doesn't exist, it can just as easily be an anomaly (based on myriad natural factors that can effect weather over a short period of time) before temperatures begin rising quickly once again. Again, most scientists believe this to be the case, based on a strong correlation over many years between CO₂ releases and temperature.

What you are doing is a slightly more thought out, well-researched version of, "heck, it's been a cold winter, so global warming must not be real after all." In the end, the issue is still the same, and the biggest problem people have with climate change: people get "weather" and "climate" confused.