+ Reply to Thread
Page 14 of 62 FirstFirst ... 4121314151624 ... LastLast
Results 131 to 140 of 613
  1. #131
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,272
    Thanks
    946
    Thanked
    1,022
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    Continuing with the question of if there is a warming trend I'll refer to this NASA page. I'm going to cut and paste some specific quotes but also include the link.

    'NASA scientists say 2012 was the ninth warmest of any year since 1880, continuing a long-term trend of rising global temperatures. With the exception of 1988, the nine warmest years in the 132-year record all have occurred since 2000, with 2010 and 2005 ranking as the hottest years on record.' Yes, yes. I know you're whole "tallest" (now your weight) theory, but let's continue anyways.

    '...compares temperatures around the globe in 2012 to the average global temperature from the mid-20th century. The comparison shows how Earth continues to experience warmer temperatures than several decades ago.'

    'The average global temperature has risen about 1.4°F (0.8°C) since 1880, according to the new analysis.'

    'Scientists emphasize that weather patterns always will cause fluctuations in average temperature from year to year, but the continued increase in greenhouse gas levels in Earth's atmosphere assures a long-term rise in global temperatures. Each successive year will not necessarily be warmer than the year before, but on the current course of greenhouse gas increases, scientists expect each successive decade to be warmer than the previous decade.'

    "What matters is this decade is warmer than the last decade, and that decade was warmer than the decade before. The planet is warming. The reason it's warming is because we are pumping increasing amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere."


    "The climate dice are now loaded. Some seasons still will be cooler than the long-term average, but the perceptive person should notice that the frequency of unusually warm extremes is increasing. It is the extremes that have the most impact on people and other life on the planet."

    'This three-decade period functions as a baseline for the analysis.'
    (just included this part for Beebs 30 years )

    And here's the link http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/news/20130115/

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Kirst33 For This Useful Post:

    beebs  (07-04-2013)

  3. #132
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,603
    Thanks
    126
    Thanked
    267
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Kirst33 View Post
    Are you kidding me? Amazing how you choose to ignore the several other SCIENTISTS that are listed with several degrees in various areas under their names, masters, PhDs, etc. But let's all believe the BubHub guy! What do you do for a living? Do you have a doctorate or masters in any of this? I openly admit I don't, but I choose to believe the 97% of the worlds scientist that believe in climate change.
    Are you kidding me? I named a couple of random ones. There were more!
    My question to you is. Why does John Cook have to rely on random people for contributors to his 'skeptical' science site? I thought people don't listen to anyone who is not a 'climate scientist'??? But you seem happen to listen to these people.

    Do you actually know where that 97% number came from. It was quite a survey! Let me know if you would like a link or two.

  4. #133
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,603
    Thanks
    126
    Thanked
    267
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Kirst33 View Post

    'This three-decade period functions as a baseline for the analysis.'
    (just included this part for Beebs 30 years )

    And here's the link http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/news/20130115/
    Yes. We've been warming since 1700. There is no argument. 0.8 degrees over 130 years? Where is this 5 degree catastrophic warming coming from? I agree with that rate of increase. There is no argument there.

    The 30 statement you are referring is in regard to the 'baseline'.

    Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) compare the average global temperature each year to the average from 1951 to 1980. This 30-year period provides a baseline from which to measure the warming Earth has experienced due to increasing atmospheric levels of heat-trapping greenhouse gases.
    They have always done that. Used the 30 year average to create the 0 line on the anomaly graphs. It does not mean you need this amount of time to determine a trend.

  5. #134
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    8,806
    Thanks
    7,267
    Thanked
    9,720
    Reviews
    5
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Father View Post
    Are you kidding me? I named a couple of random ones. There were more!
    My question to you is. Why does John Cook have to rely on random people for contributors to his 'skeptical' science site? I thought people don't listen to anyone who is not a 'climate scientist'??? But you seem happen to listen to these people.

    Do you actually know where that 97% number came from. It was quite a survey! Let me know if you would like a link or two.
    I've just been quietly reading along here, just wondering if you would mind answering the question about your qualifications and occupation, father?
    I'm certainly no scientist but I tend to agree with the majority here that if the vast majority of scientists agree that global warming is happening, then it likely is.

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Atropos For This Useful Post:

    beebs  (07-04-2013)

  7. #135
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    my house
    Posts
    17,699
    Thanks
    1,391
    Thanked
    7,288
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 postsEmerald Star - 10,000 postsRuby Star - 15,000 posts
    As far as I can remember, he's (Father) in the military.
    Last edited by BigRedV; 06-04-2013 at 17:17.

  8. #136
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,272
    Thanks
    946
    Thanked
    1,022
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Father View Post
    Are you kidding me? I named a couple of random ones. There were more!
    My question to you is. Why does John Cook have to rely on random people for contributors to his 'skeptical' science site? I thought people don't listen to anyone who is not a 'climate scientist'??? But you seem happen to listen to these people.

    Do you actually know where that 97% number came from. It was quite a survey! Let me know if you would like a link or two.
    Why did you not answer any of my other questions? Also, I went through the list, there were several climate scientists listed... But I'll take NASA as the final say, they are one of the four agencies that report on global temperature trends and I'll include the link again that they conclude there is a trend in warming http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/news/20130115/.

    But I'll include bits from the other agencies as well:

    NOAA: '...which confirms that the past decade was the warmest on record and that the Earth has been growing warmer over the last 50 years.'

    'Based on comprehensive data from multiple sources, the report defines 10 measurable planet-wide features used to gauge global temperature changes. The relative movement of each of these indicators proves consistent with a warming world. Seven indicators are rising: air temperature over land, sea-surface temperature, air temperature over oceans, sea level, ocean heat, humidity and tropospheric temperature in the “active-weather” layer of the atmosphere closest to the Earth’s surface. Three indicators are declining: Arctic sea ice, glaciers and spring snow cover in the Northern hemisphere.'

    “The records come from many institutions worldwide. They use data collected from diverse sources, including satellites, weather balloons, weather stations, ships, buoys and field surveys. These independently produced lines of evidence all point to the same conclusion: our planet is warming,”

    'While year-to-year changes in temperature often reflect natural climatic variations such as El Niño/La Niña events, changes in average temperature from decade-to-decade reveal long-term trends such as global warming. Each of the last three decades has been much warmer than the decade before. At the time, the 1980s was the hottest decade on record. In the 1990s, every year was warmer than the average of the previous decade. The 2000s were warmer still.'

    http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories...heclimate.html

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to Kirst33 For This Useful Post:

    beebs  (07-04-2013)

  10. #137
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    2,565
    Thanks
    2,851
    Thanked
    1,254
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by pegasus View Post
    The harm is that I don't believe that the tax does encourage "high polluters" to use more environmentally friendly methods.

    In fact I know of a council which pays it due to waste that is within its area, not the "pollution" it produces. This has been passed on to its residents.

    A tax that does not achieve what it purports is economically and politically damaging to the government who implements it
    How is it economically damaging? Neither of you has answered the question regarding the harm of the carbon tax.

    As for not needing incentives to develop & commercialise technology... this is simply untrue. Government incentives are required to fund development that would otherwise not occur due to high risks and long payback periods that mean private investors are less likely to invest. Renewable energy technologies are highly capital intensive. Also, without a tax on non-renewable energy production there is less incentive for this type of technology to be developed.

  11. #138
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    8,806
    Thanks
    7,267
    Thanked
    9,720
    Reviews
    5
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 postsAmber Star - 2,000 postsAmethyst Star - 5,000 posts
    Quote Originally Posted by BigRedV View Post
    As far as I can remember, he's (Father) in the military.
    So's my cousin. He's a cook. In the navy.
    I'm curious about what Father actually does and what qualifications he has that make him confident in disregarding the educated opinions of so many scientists, iykwim?

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to Atropos For This Useful Post:

    beebs  (07-04-2013)

  13. #139
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,272
    Thanks
    946
    Thanked
    1,022
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    The other two agencies JMA and HADCRU do not have much listed in terms of articles on global warming (I'm still searching).

    Here is some from JMA: 'The 14 warmest years on record have all occurred in the past 16 years (Table 1). The recent high temperatures are best explained as a consequence of disturbed energy balance between the incoming solar radiation and the outgoing infrared radiation caused by an increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations. Imposed on the long-term warming trend, natural variability inherent in the earth’s climate system is considered to contribute to annual to decadal temperature fluctuations.'
    http://ds.data.jma.go.jp/tcc/tcc/new...s_20130205.pdf

  14. #140
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,272
    Thanks
    946
    Thanked
    1,022
    Reviews
    0
    Achievements:Topaz Star - 500 posts
    And this is why I'd like you to include your links when you include pictures of graphs, because often there is a conclusion written at the bottom, rather than what you are just cherry-picking.

    Here's a link to a graph regarding the global sea surface temperature on JMA: http://www.data.kishou.go.jp/kaiyou/...lb_warm_e.html

    And it says all you agree with, the .51C per century. But then they CONCLUDE that the rise is most likely from greenhouse gases. 'most of the increase seen since the mid-20th century is very likely to have been caused by the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations.' Therefore, not naturally occurring, humans are warming the Earth.

    Whether you agree with it or not, it's pretty conclusive from at least three out of the four global agencies that measure temperature that the Earth is warming and that it is due to more greenhouse gases. Some of these agencies have also concluded that at the rate we are going (and you agreed as well) that we will reach at least 1.5C higher in temp and that this has the ability to cause certain plant and animal species to become extinct. I'm sorry, but that makes me sad, and why would I not want to do what I can to avoid that? My personal belief on the carbon tax is that it is too soon to determine if it will have an effect in emissions, but why not try? Why not do all we can to try? I've been a statistic. Even if in the best case scenario, global warming isn't happening as fast as some think it is it is still a risk. To somebody who has been a statistic before, I could care less at how unlikely you think it may be, because I've BEEN the UNLIKELY. There is a 1-2% chance you will loose your baby after 12 weeks. I am that 1-2% chance. You may believe there's a low chance of global warming being as bad as MANY think it is, but why risk it? Why not try all you can to change it and make sure that risk is even lower or non-existent?

    Again I ask you, what is the conspiracy that you believe in? What are all these agencies, scientists, governments, organizations, etc. all conspiring for? What do they all have to gain from convincing us all that the world is warming? And why are you right?

  15. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Kirst33 For This Useful Post:

    beebs  (07-04-2013),SJG  (06-04-2013)


 

Similar Threads

  1. Vanuatu - Great or not so great?
    By Clarabelle in forum Destination Suggestions
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 29-10-2012, 10:56
  2. Green poop
    By Alphabetsoup in forum General Parenting Tips, Advice & Chat
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 24-05-2012, 20:02

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
free weekly newsletters | sign up now!
who are these people who write great posts? meet our hubbub authors!
Learn how you can contribute to the hubbub!

reviews
learn how you can become a reviewer!

competitions

forum - chatting now
christmas gift guidesee all Red Stocking
Pebblebee
Parents spend hours looking for things they need NOW. The keys, the remote, darling daughter's treasured teddy. Stop wasting precious time looking & start finding with Bub Hub reviewed Pebblebee Smart Tag. Simply attach a Pebblebee and find it fast.
sales & new stuffsee all
Wendys Music School Melbourne
Wondering about Music Lessons? FREE 30 minute ASSESSMENT. Find out if your child is ready! Piano from age 3 years & Guitar, Singing, Drums, Violin from age 5. Lessons available for all ages. 35+ years experience. Structured program.
Use referral 'bubhub' when booking
featured supporter
LCF Fun Languages Australia
We offer foreign language lessons for children 2-12 yrs in French, Spanish, Mandarin, Italian or German as after-school and preschool clubs or private language tuition. This is play-based, full immersion language learning with proven results!
gotcha
X

Pregnant for the first-time?

Not sure where to start? We can help!

Our Insider Programs for pregnancy first-timers will lead you step-by-step through the 14 Pregnancy Must Dos!