Global warming 'undeniable,' report says

Global warming 'undeniable,' report says

www.cbc.ca

Scientists from around the world are providing even more evidence of global warming.

"A comprehensive review of key climate indicators confirms the world is warming and the past decade was the warmest on record," the annual State of the Climate report declares.

Compiled by more than 300 scientists from 48 countries, including Canada, the report from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said its analysis of 10 indicators that are "clearly and directly related to surface temperatures, all tell the same story: Global warming is undeniable."



Read more: www.cb...

(visit the link for the full news article)

The new climate report, published as a supplement to the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, focused on 10 indicators of a warming world, seven of which are increasing and three declining.

Rising over decades are average air temperature, the ratio of water vapour to air, ocean heat content, sea surface temperature, sea level, air temperature over the ocean and air temperature over land.

Indicators that are declining are snow cover, glaciers and sea ice.

The 10 were selected "because they were the most obviously related indicators of global temperature," explained Peter Thorne of the Co-operative Institute for Climate and Satellites, who helped develop the list when at the British weather service, known as the Met Office.

"What this data is doing is, it is screaming that the world is warming," Thorne concluded.

www.cbc.ca
(visit the link for the full news article)

Hrmmm... so who are the 300 scientists?


where's the data for us to look at?

They keep bringing out the Boogeyman and beating him like a dead horse.

oh and while we are at the GW debate. I'd like a definitive answer on whether tempature drives CO2 or CO2 drives temperature.
If it's the former then GW is full of crap.

And there are reports that say global warming is a myth and lie, what about it.

I thought we were on line to have the hottest year on record, due to El Nino or whatever.

Here in Quebec, the winter was almost snowless, the spring came 6weeks early (ive been in shorts since april!!) and the summer has been hot hot hot.

Global Climate change, bah, what crock!

edited my terrible spelling

[edit on 29-7-2010 by Le Colonel]

Some environmentalists are seeing this for what it is...

You know they hypothesis of anthropogenic global warming is in dire trouble when a liberal environmentalist trashes it publicly. That is just what physicist Dr. Denis Rancourt, a former professor and environmental science researcher at the University of Ottawa, has done. He’s decided to bail on this nutty theory that doesn’t even pass the smell-test of credibility, and not only that, he’s exposing it for the barrel of fraud that it has always been. He hasn’t completely come in from the cold and given up on liberalism, but at least he’s no longer willing to drink the Koolaid on anthropogenic global warming.

link

Has anyone else noticed that Canadians love Global Warming?


I theorize it's because of some or all of the following-

1. Their cold climate

2. Their Oil /Tar sands (Canada being the number 1 oil importer to the USA)

3. The huge emerging market selling refrigerators to Eskimos.

Just because it has been the hottest decade on record does not mean that global warming is real. I guarantee if somehow we had temperature records from the time when life began, this past decade wouldn't be the hottest.

This decade compared to the time life has been on this earth is a blip. To me using this arguement to claim global warming is "undeniable" is like saying when someone takes their first sip of alcohol they are an alcoholic.

So stupid. "Science" is going to have to have a better arguement than that.

Originally posted by GeechQuestInfo
Just because it has been the hottest decade on record does not mean that global warming is real. I guarantee if somehow we had temperature records from the time when life began, this past decade wouldn't be the hottest.

This decade compared to the time life has been on this earth is a blip. To me using this arguement to claim global warming is "undeniable" is like saying when someone takes their first sip of alcohol they are an alcoholic.

So stupid. "Science" is going to have to have a better arguement than that.

How does it matter to us and the next generation what happened "when life began on Earth?"

What matters is the immediate future, and things are getting a bit warm.

Just because things are getting hot does not prove global warming is real was my point.

Ok. I understand the earth is getting hot. I also understand man can't stop it as much as people would like to beleive.

Hybrid cars would do it right? Well there are more hybrid cars now than ever before and the temp continues to rise.

Well taxing carbon emmisions will reduce our CO2 levels right? Maybe a little bit but it won't stop the temperature from rising and it's not gonna stop big business from poluting. There just gonna pay to polute because it would still be cheaper than switching to the alternatives that are being talked about. And big business is about money not
reducing CO2.

You an cry and whine all you want, you can't stop
the sun.

Man can control the weather, he can't control the climate.

[edit on 29-7-2010 by GeechQuestInfo]

[edit on 29-7-2010 by GeechQuestInfo]

Originally posted by GeechQuestInfo

So stupid. "Science" is going to have to have a better arguement than that.

What's stupid is to believe that releasing massive amounts of energy into the atmosphere doesn't somehow have an impact.

Ever looked at a pendulum in science class? What happens when you add energy to the system?

Yep, the extremes go more extreme, and the average slowly increases.

Originally posted by __rich__
How does it matter to us and the next generation what happened "when life began on Earth?"

What matters is the immediate future, and things are getting a bit warm.

It matters because it shows that the Earth has natural cooling/heating cycles, and the fact that we're here doesn't mean that we're necessarily causing the cycles. If the cycles happened before humans, then it's pointless to worry about, because it'll happen regardless of how stringent we make our own restrictions.

Aside from that, every time the Earth had a warming cycle in the past, life flourished. Every time there was a cooling cycle, things got bad. Global warming isn't the apocalypse everyone's trying to make it out to be.

And what is the greatest source of energy on this planet?

Well, technically it's not on this planet, but it's the sun.

So until science starts to recognize that man isn't causing the temperature increase I will continue to think that global warming science is stupid.

Besides, I said climate science was stupid for using "this decade has been the hottest on record" as their argument for claiming global warming was undeniable.

Also, nobody in this post nor I claim that releasing "massive amounts of energy" into the atmosphere does not have an impact. No idea where that comment came from.

I think the question is, will these massive amounts of energy cause an ELE? The answer is no.

[edit on 29-7-2010 by GeechQuestInfo]

Pffft, they're just trying to justify "green taxes" and attempt some damage control here. It's got to be the sun, not us, but I'm not in danger of getting my scientific funding cut off if I disagree with the whole global warming farce.

Originally posted by EsSeeEye

Originally posted by __rich__
How does it matter to us and the next generation what happened "when life began on Earth?"

What matters is the immediate future, and things are getting a bit warm.

It matters because it shows that the Earth has natural cooling/heating cycles, and the fact that we're here doesn't mean that we're necessarily causing the cycles. If the cycles happened before humans, then it's pointless to worry about, because it'll happen regardless of how stringent we make our own restrictions.

Aside from that, every time the Earth had a warming cycle in the past, life flourished. Every time there was a cooling cycle, things got bad. Global warming isn't the apocalypse everyone's trying to make it out to be.

And according to all available evidence, we should be entering another ice age.

But we keep on warming up, instead.

I think people tend to underestimate the ever- growing and cumulative effects humanity can have on the environment.

Humanity has created artificial radiation belts than span the globe from high altitude nuclear tests.

The "Great Dust Bowl" comes to mind from improper farming techniques.

Russia has nearly drained the Aral Sea from irrigation.

The Amazon rainforests are being slashed and burned at a rate that can be seen from space.

Nobody says man does not have an effect on the environment. I believe what people argue is whether or not man is causing the increase in temperature and also whether this increase in temperature will be the death of civilization.

The answer to both of those is no.

Your cases of environmental changes due to man are true. None of them caused the demise of civilization, and "global warming" will not either.

Originally posted by GeechQuestInfo
Just because things are getting hot does not prove global warming is real was my point.

Ok. I understand the earth is getting hot. I also understand man can't stop it as much as people would like to beleive.

I was originally going to just sit back and watch the debate, but when I saw this post, I HAD to jump in.

Now that I have stopped laughing, lets see if I follow your logic... the earth is getting hotter but that is no proof that the earth is getting warmer??? huh? So global warming is not evidence of global warming?

Classic!

[edit on 29-7-2010 by metamagic]

Fair.

What I should have said was man made global warming, but I figured at this juncture when one says "global warming" it is inferred that they are talking about "man made global warming". Sorry if I "confused" you with the semantics.

Originally posted by grey580
Hrmmm... so who are the 300 scientists?


where's the data for us to look at?

They keep bringing out the Boogeyman and beating him like a dead horse.

oh and while we are at the GW debate. I'd like a definitive answer on whether tempature drives CO2 or CO2 drives temperature.
If it's the former then GW is full of crap.

Try reading the article and going to the sources. The point it there are 10 different indicators with all of the data associated with them. But I have a suspicion that even if all of the data were reproduced in this thread, your mind would still be made up.. which is that this is a dead horse.

And by the way, global warming is about global temperatures increasing.. the data is not invalidated because of a argument over the theory of a causative mechanism. Are you suggesting that if temperature drives CO2 then the the temperatures are NOT increasing.. in spite of the data? That is ludicrous.

Originally posted by GeechQuestInfo
Nobody says man does not have an effect on the environment. I believe what people argue is whether or not man is causing the increase in temperature and also whether this increase in temperature will be the death of civilization.

The answer to both of those is no.

Your cases of environmental changes due to man are true. None of them caused the demise of civilization, and "global warming" will not either.

Well , that settles the debate, then.

Whew. For a minute there I was getting worried.

Keep on burnin' them there fossilized fuels! Party ON!