Wisconsin Weather -why do I stay here

[farmerEd]

The problem is there are just as many scientists who will tell you that global warming is not happening as there are who claim it is.

Would those be the same scientists that argued that smoking doesn't cause cancer either? Amazing what you can beleive when your paycheck counts on it...

Global warming is a fact...even those few scientists are arguing about is whether or not it is man-made. Average temps are rising, as are the seas - what we can do about it, is up for debate.

Arguing that there is no Global warming is like arguing there is no cancer because you don't believe cigarettes are to blame.

 

[sgeeeee]

Just in case my previous post wasn't clear, I was joking about global warming helping anyone. CT is absolutely correct. The legitimate scientific community recognizes that global warming is real. OldMcD's comparison to the tobacco industry is on target. Decades after legitimate scientists understood that smoking caused cancer the tobacco industry was still able to produce paid-for pseudo-science studies that indicated there was some question. Now we have poluting industries, the politicians and academics they've funded, and FOX news pretending that there are still questions about global warming.

 

[FinanceDude]

I think there IS global warming, and it's helping to accelerate us into a "mini Ice Age" like we had from about 1300-1700 AD. The huge increase in the volcanic activity under the ocean, polar ice caps melting, swings in the temp of the ocean's currents.........a lot of this points to an Ice Age of some consequence.

According to geological history, the Earth has a true Ice Age every 12000 years, and it's been over 12000 years since the last one, so

 

[laurence]

Hmm, the only thing I've heard that's legitimate wrt global warming = ice age is if we turn off the atlantic current motor due to desalinisation of the gulf stream with Greenlad melt. Basically, that stream helps keep Europe warmer and if turned off it could experience a mini-ice age. But recent readings on that current indicate they have no evidence of it slowing down, so that's not a worry-yet.

Also, last ice age ended about 10k years ago, and the gap between has been moving from every 40k years to 100k.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_age

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

Huh, I thought the recent readings on the gulf stream and the north atlantic drift showed some slowing in recent times.

The predictor I saw said such a reversal could lead to 20-50 degree downward swings in average temperatures in the northeast US and europe.

Plus theres this huge potential tsunami that could happen at any moment and wipe out the eastern seaboard http://www.rense.com/general56/tsu.htm

Any wonder why I moved to the west coast?

 

[laurence]

I don't know about the tidal wave, but NPR had a story that the initial concerns were caused by snap shot readings of the current, and more detailed, continuous readings found that it varies in speed so much day to day that they don't suspect there is any real change yet. Basically, those snap shots happen to give a false impression of slowing, but continual readings show it slow, speed up, slow again, etc.

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

So what you're saying is that the gulf stream is the 90 year old driver of the oceanic world?

Has the left blinker been on for the last 300 years?

 

[laurence]

And it keeps scraping the fender on Greenland!

 

[windsurf]

Is there actually a climatologist in the peanut gallery? Is there anybody who is not a scientist who has sorted out the peer reviewed studies? Which political agenda has the most to gain or lose from propagandizing the commentary on the science one way or the other? Who is going to pay the penalty for the mistake either way?

 

[Cut-Throat]

Is there actually a climatologist in the peanut gallery? Is there anybody who is not a scientist who has sorted out the peer reviewed studies? Which political agenda has the most to gain or lose from propagandizing the commentary on the science one way or the other? Who is going to pay the penalty for the mistake either way?

Why throw up Red Herrings? - The World's scientists agree that it is a problem and it needs solving! I don't think we need anyone here to second guess them! :

 

[sgeeeee]

Is there actually a climatologist in the peanut gallery? Is there anybody who is not a scientist who has sorted out the peer reviewed studies? Which political agenda has the most to gain or lose from propagandizing the commentary on the science one way or the other? Who is going to pay the penalty for the mistake either way?

There is a lot of good, very readable information at the US Environmental Protection Agency web site:

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/basicinfo.html

Science
For over the past 200 years, the burning of fossil fuels, such as coal and oil, and deforestation have caused the concentrations of heat-trapping "greenhouse gases" to increase significantly in our atmosphere. These gases prevent heat from escaping to space, somewhat like the glass panels of a greenhouse.
Greenhouse gases are necessary to life as we know it, because they keep the planet's surface warmer than it otherwise would be. But, as the concentrations of these gases continue to increase in the atmosphere, the Earth's temperature is climbing above past levels. According to NOAA and NASA data, the Earth's average surface temperature has increased by about 1.2 to 1.4ºF since 1900. The warmest global average temperatures on record have all occurred within the past 15 years, with the warmest two years being 1998 and 2005. Most of the warming in recent decades is likely the result of human activities. Other aspects of the climate are also changing such as rainfall patterns, snow and ice cover, and sea level.
If greenhouse gases continue to increase, climate models predict that the average temperature at the Earth's surface could increase from 2.5 to 10.4ºF above 1990 levels by the end of this century. Scientists are certain that human activities are changing the composition of the atmosphere, and that increasing the concentration of greenhouse gases will change the planet's climate. But they are not sure by how much it will change, at what rate it will change, or what the exact effects will be. See the Science and Health and Environmental Effects sections of this site for more detail. . .

 

[mh]

Why throw up Red Herrings? - The World's scientists agree that it is a problem and it needs solving! I don't think we need anyone here to second guess them! :

what's to solve ? stop burning fossil fuels. you go first

 

[Cut-Throat]

I decided to split this topic into CFL and LED Lightbulbs as there was a lot of good info regarding the different technologies.

Light Bulb discussion has its own thread now.

 

[Ed_The_Gypsy]

what's to solve ? stop burning fossil fuels. you go first

Just try to tell 3 billion Chinese and 1 billion Indians that thay can't have two cars like North Americans! How likely do you think that is?

Unless and until humans can reduce their numbers and birthrate, in the long run anything we do is futile.

Anything else is science fiction. I wish it were otherwise, but it ain't so. I am concerned about my children's future.