Science Features
Oct 13, 2008, 5:06 GMT
What warming? Climate change slips among global priorities
And Also
Similar articles
- Climate-change adaptation to cost 75-90 billion dollars
- Arctic getting hotter than ever, warns World Wide Fund for Nature
- Conservation group warns of more birds in danger of extinction
- FAO: Abandoned fishing nets damaging marine environment
- Global association: Birds, amphibians susceptible to climate change
Latest Headlines in Science
- 1. Climate saviour or false messiah? 'Clean coal' on trial
- 2. Will the EU's Saharan solar dream bring a brighter future?
- 3. South Korea set its carbon reduction target at 30 per cent
- 4. ANALYSIS: Agreement in Copenhagen could usher in brave new world
- 5. ANALYSIS: World without a climate treaty would suffer, but how much?
Older Talkback
...the global warming scare has so little real science to back it up, and the politicians know it.
We know for certain SP4 has nothing to back him up ,science has already ruled on this ,the only parameter that leads to disagrement is the speed at which it will happen.Things are bleak:the latet prognosis is that sea level might rise 6 meters within the next thirty years.Other bas new is the release of methane from seabeds and tundra;we are talking billions oftons of it,the effect of which is 20 times more potent than CO2 in terms of global warming .SP4 is just the best incentive available for the USA to spend more money on education.
more of this bad news from this same site.Tell me these are all lies SP4
www.monstersandcritics.com/science/news/article_1437561.php/Arctic_gets _red_report_card_for_record_melting_of_ice
Which part do you have trouble understanding ?
...these so called scientists are having their data dismembered by their peers. Apparantly, the leaders of the world are willing to entertain this nonsense until a real threat to their incumbancy comes along and drop it all at a moments notice.
That tells me a lot about what they really know...how about you?
Global warming may soon become such a problem that we might forget the finantial problems.
How much is a house worth when it's underwater and how much is a farm worth when it won't grow crops?
I would like to ask you - What part of record Arctic ice loss, what part of 97% of glaciers are melting, some very rapidly, what part of previously unknown massive releases of methane in Arctic regions, what part of the increasing ferocity of storms, what part of increasing desertification, what part of previously unknown insect infestations, ETC, ETC, ETC has not been scientifically proven?
What makes you think any of this is related to C02 content in the atmosphere? 30 years ago, they were predicting global cooling. Tell us, how, exactly, did THAT work out?
Thirty years ago they were right about global cooling, they discovered that the climate was like a bouncing ball bouncing down a slope. It had highpoints but the general trend was consistantly downhill. Co2 and now methane in the atmosphere have changed all that and now we are now in a global warming situation.
I was around at the time and remember well the conclusions. At the time South American and Norwegian glaciers were advancing. Scientific instuments can reach contravertial conclusions, glaciers never lie.
Gaiacomm International to develop Defeat IED technology for America
Gaiacomm International will develop Counter (defeat) IED technology for the US Military to be used in Iraq, Afghanistan and other conflict zones. This technology is currently classified because of its accurate nature of detection. When deployed it will be able to detect and disable any device in the ground, on person (suicide bombers), inside vehicle or building's within a determined range, also classified. Soldiers are dying thus, the emphasis on accurate detection. Other technologies currently in the field simply do not operate as planned, thus the need for Gaiacomm's technology.
Meanwhile the american voters have recognized the problem and warmed up to the response.Obama's plans will reduce carbon emissions to a fraction of the current by 2050 .All the lunatics such as SP4 are now off to the garbage bin of history,good ridance.Yhank you for electing Obama...
Anyway,who care a bout anything SP4 has to say;didn't he claim the US economy going through the roof a few months ago?Expect nothing from such source of wisdom.
GW is just one symptom of over-population. Same-sex sex only please at least for the next decade. No, wait. That won't work either. Let's just solve GW and see what happens next.
that SP4 guy is both ignorant and bragging about it
look at the ice core data - it shows that at no time ever in the history of our planet have we have CO2 levels even close to where they are now
it is not a natural cycle or occurance
it is only related to industrialization and overpopulation
you just cannot have a high quality of living for as many people as are on the planet
personally I think we are doomed because people still don't understand why they should have zero, one or two children and no more than that
there are too many very stupid people on this planet and they will keep breeding until the whole thing collapses rather than understanding the issues and making intelligent choices, like limiting family size
ShannonNov 19th, 2008 - 23:17:30
that SP4 guy is both ignorant and bragging about it
look at the ice core data - it shows that at no time ever in the history of our planet have we have CO2 levels even close to where they are now
SP4_ global warming has happened repeatedly for billions of years, and human C02 has only recently been present. Tell us Shannon, how do you reconcile this? Second, what makes you think ice cores are an accurate measure of C02 over time?
it is not a natural cycle or occurance
SP4 - and how do you arrive at this conclusion, given the questions above?
it is only related to industrialization and overpopulation
sp4 - again, professor Shannon, global warming and cooling has happened for billions of years, with man only contributing for the last 100 years....how do you square that little fact?
you just cannot have a high quality of living for as many people as are on the planet
SP4_ by what calculation do you arrive at such a conclusion? 25 years ago, these same climatologists were predicting global cooling....tell us Professor, what was the rationalization for THAT?
personally I think we are doomed because people still don't understand why they should have zero, one or two children and no more than that
SP4 - Really...?....perhaps you can tell us what effect more children have to do with global warming????
there are too many very stupid people on this planet and they will keep breeding until the whole thing collapses rather than understanding the issues and making intelligent choices, like limiting family size
SP4 - well, you and I certainly agree on the first premise! Now, Shannon, go ponder those niggly questions I posed and, by all means, get back to us.
This problem has already been solved.
An economic meltdown reduces human's impact on ice meltdown. It is the number one best way for an environmental solution.
Case closed. As long as humans don't get their nasty hands on free money they won't be able to feed their consumer and credit addiction and then manufacturing smoke stacks will stop billowing out pollution. They will stop taking plane vacations they can't afford (except for the president and CEOs of car manufacturers), and they will stop cutting down trees to make 2nd and 3rd houses, etc., etc., etc.
They will be forced, simply due to lack of money, to not be the plague on this planet they have proven to be.
..Tonny has all the carbon reduction he wants with the economy the way it is, Obama's proposed tax hikes, the Big Three going belly up.....heck, US power companies are seeing power sale reductions they think are permenant.
I guess we can all be happy, eh? I know I feel better. Pity about that 500,000 folks out of work though.
www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?MLC=/opinion/columnists/christopher_ booker&xml=/opinion/2008/11/16/do1610.xml&CMP=ILC-mostviewedbox
Amateur team finds NASA error similar to one they discovered a year ago.
NASA'S Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) is one of the world's primary sources for climate data. GISS issues regular updates on world temperatures based on their analysis of temperature readings from thousands of monitoring stations over the globe.
GISS’ most recent data release originally reported last October as being extraordinarily warm-- a full 0.78C above normal. This would have made it the warmest October on record; a huge increase over the previous month's data.
Those results set off alarm bells with Steve McIntyre and his gang of Baker Street irregulars at Climateaudit.org. They noted that NASA's data didn't agree at all with the satellite temperature record, which showed October to be very mild, continuing the same trend of slight cooling that has persisted since 1998. So they dug a little deeper.
McIntyre, the same man who found errors last year in GISS's US temperature record, quickly noted that most of the temperature increase was coming from Russia. A chart of world temperatures showed that in October, most of Russia, the largest nation on Earth, was not only registering hot, but literally off the scale. Yet anecdotal reports were suggesting that worldwide, October was actually slightly colder than normal. Could there be another error in GISS's data?
An alert reader on McIntyre's blog revealed that there was a very large problem. Looking at the actual readings from individual stations in Russia showed a curious anomaly. The locations had all been assigned the exact temperatures from a month earlier-- the much warmer month of September. Russia cools very rapidly in the fall months, so recycling the data from the earlier month had led to a massive temperature increase.
A few locations in Ireland were also found to be using September data.
Steve McIntyre informed GISS of the error by email. According to McIntyre, there was no response, but within 'about an hour', GISS pulled down the erroneous data, citing a 'mishap' and pointing the finger of blame upstream to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminstration (NOAA).
NOAA's Deputy Director of Communications, Scott Smullens, tells DailyTech that NOAA is responsible only for temperature readings in the US, not those in other nations.
The error not only affected October data, but due to the complex algorithm GISS uses to convert actual temperature readings into their output results, altered the previously published values for several other months as well. The values for August 2008, for instance, changed by 0.11C and the global anomaly as far back as 2005 increased by a hundredth of a degree.
GISS is run by Dr. James Hansen, a strident global warming advocate who has accused oil companies of 'crimes against humanity'. Hansen recently made headlines when he travelled to London to testify on behalf of a group of environmentalists who had damaged a coal plant in protest against global warming. Hansen also serves as science advisor to Al Gore.
Dr. Hansen could not be reached for comment.
----------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------
Scandinavian nation reverses trend, mirrors results in Alaska, elsewhere.
After years of decline, glaciers in Norway are again growing, reports the Norwegian Water Resources and Energy Directorate (NVE). The actual magnitude of the growth, which appears to have begun over the last two years, has not yet been quantified, says NVE Senior Engineer Hallgeir Elvehøy.
The flow rate of many glaciers has also declined. Glacier flow ultimately acts to reduce accumulation, as the ice moves to lower, warmer elevations.
The original trend had been fairly rapid decline since the year 2000.
The developments were originally reported by the Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation (NRK).
DailyTech has previously reported on the growth in Alaskan glaciers, reversing a 250-year trend of loss. Some glaciers in Canada, California, and New Zealand are also growing, as the result of both colder temperatures and increased snowfall.
Ed Josberger, a glaciologist with the U.S. Geological Survey, says the growth is 'a bit of an anomaly', but not to be unexpected.
Despite the recent growth, most glaciers in the nation are still smaller than they were in 1982. However, Elvehøy says that the glaciers were even smaller during the 'Medieval Warm Period' of the Viking Era, prior to around the year 1350.
Not all Norwegian glaciers appear to be affected, most notably those in the Jotenheimen region of Southern Norway.
..puts the myth in perspective.
Your Talkback on this Story