Consensus dissipating on global warming?
Global-warming skepticism has apparently gone mainstream enough to get the attention of Politico.
On the cusp of getting the most progressive Congressional leadership in
history, the science used to argue……

Hun? Those cycles are on the order of tens of thousands of years. How do you expect them to account for the last decade?

Count to 10 on November 17, 2008 at 11:23 AM

Basically the gist of Milankovitch model is how temperatures varies in the natural cycle due to these 3 factors: the Earth’s orbit around the sun 2. the tilt of the axis of the Earth’s rotation. 3. The position of the equinoxes in their precessional cycle. I got that from a class handout so can’t link it unfortunately. His model has been accurate in predicting the temperature of the earth in past history. And right now it says that we should be in a cooling cycle, not warming.

For those that doubt the Earth has been warming up, just go to any of the many glaciers that are receding throughout the world. I’ve been to the Athabasca glacier in Canada and its scary to seen how quickly its receding. Furthermore, we have a record of correlation between increase C02 levels and temperature rises in the ice cores in Antarctic. So if the glaciers are receding when they should be expanding, because the world should be undergoing a cooling period. And we have past records of how increases in co2 levels correlates with increases in temperature. How is there any doubt?

Oh, and here’s some links to peer-reviewed articles skeptical of global warming. link

Note that I’m a believer in being a good steward of our natural resources. I just don’t believe in blind obedience to ideas.

hawksruleva on November 17, 2008 at 9:44 AM

Thanks for the links, I guess I should refine my statement to say credible peer-review articles. But I’ll try to get my dean of science to look at them and tell me what he thinks. If I’m wrong, I’ll be the first to offer a big mea culpa on this board. I live in Florida, so if global warming is a big hoax, then I would be ecstatic. Since warming ocean temperatures are catastrophic for my state economy due to increases of the number and severity of hurricanes that are brought about by warmer ocean temperatures.

whereas I can pretty much write in advance the ’scientific conclusions of the computer models’ anytime you want. The general public has been dumbed down to an incredible degree.

cjk on November 17, 2008 at 1:09 PM

It’s amazing how someone with a little bit of scientific training can amaze and wow the ignorant into believing anything. Just throw up a few graphs & make wild predictions. No one cares if it’s true. This is how Al Gore can still make $$. So much ignorance….
I give up trying to explain the ‘science’ of the APGW scare crowd to people. Most don’t care or believe what they want to believe.
I just do my little part by teaching my high schoolers some objective critical thinking skills & pray most of them become critically thinking adults.

According to Milankovitch mathematical model the world should actually be undergoing a global cooling cycle right now instead of getting warming.
Ric on November 16, 2008 at 9:54 PM

Hun? Those cycles are on the order of tens of thousands of years. How do you expect them to account for the last decade?
The only thing that correlates well with temperatures is sunspot activity. I still haven’t heard of any new climate models that can accurately model the last century, let alone the future.
Whatever warming has been caused by burning fossil fuels is quite frankly lost in the noise, and claiming anything else is dishonest.

Without that, GISS may as well be studying the entrails of goats to make predictions about the future climate.

Come on, let’s not give goat entrail examination a bad name. It clearly has more validity than does the voodoo environmentofascism.

I particularly like the polar bear population story. One area has seen their bear population grow from 850 to 3,000. And they’re fatter than ever. link

Note that I’m a believer in being a good steward of our natural resources. I just don’t believe in blind obedience to ideas.

In 20 years (or any other period in our lifetimes, of your choosing), we’ll meet in Times Square.

At that time, if Times Square is under water, or if New York was forced to build dikes to keep out the water, I’ll pay you.

If not, you’ll pay me.

Sound fair enough?

It’s really astounding that some people still think global warming is a hoax. There is zero debate among scientifically peer reviewed articles that global warming is happening and that it is due to man.

Ric on November 16, 2008 at 9:54 PM

ROFLMAO

You’re a funny guy. Either that, or you’re just incredibly stupid.