SCI/TECH: EU Releases Report Predicting Rough Weather

The European Environment Agency released a report saying that the agency expects more frequent floods, violent storms, and droughts due to climate changes within Europe. The report was produced to recommend to the EU the steps necessary to prepare for the coming changes.



The EEA's executive director was quoted as saying. "The climate changes will considerably affect our societies and environments for decades and centuries to come�. The EU is planning to combat the changes by reducing their output of greenhouse gases, the theorized cause of global warming.

[edit on 8-18-2004 by Valhall]

I would say it's already happening, this year northern Finland got record class heat wave when southern Finland was drowning to water.
For example Southern Finland average temperature stayed much below nominal in July when in Northern Finland it was almost four degrees above average.


In last year start of year was very cold, temperature stayed under -20 celsius for long time and was couple weeks about -30. Then in July we got three week heat wave when temperature rose to 32-33 in shadow and stayed above 25 even at nights, humidity was also "tropical".

There is very little scientific basis to this story. It is news filler to try and offset what has been a very mild summer for much of Europe and the US. When you have summers like this people start to have doubts about the global warming theory so reports like this get published to keep the public in fear. The fact is most of these people have no clue what they are doing and frankly they make stuff up and use each others bad science as references in their own bad work. Global warming as portrayed amounts to the tail wagging the dog.

Originally posted by Indy
There is very little scientific basis to this story. It is news filler to try and offset what has been a very mild summer for much of Europe and the US. When you have summers like this people start to have doubts about the global warming theory so reports like this get published to keep the public in fear. The fact is most of these people have no clue what they are doing and frankly they make stuff up and use each others bad science as references in their own bad work. Global warming as portrayed amounts to the tail wagging the dog.

just out of curiosity, what is to be gained by keeping the public in fear of global warming?

-koji K.

Originally posted by koji_K

just out of curiosity, what is to be gained by keeping the public in fear of global warming?

-koji K.

I don't know really, I personally don't believe global warming could be prevented or caused by humans. Its all part of earth cycles... people are spending tons of money on this stuff wasting tons of time. But for some reason some people care. I guess fear is power.

FEAR = Falsified Evidence Appearing Real

koji_K... MONEY. Global warming as portrayed to the public amounts to nothing more than scientific extortion. These are special interest groups trying to extort money from governments using fear. It is a poorly developed theory where their own models have failed miserably yet they continue to portray this as real and as a consensus when in reality there is no consensus. They just claim it but have nothing to back it up. They are part of the vocal minority that does whatever necessary to dominate the press. This is done so grant money keeps coming in.

The fact is no one really knows for sure whether CO2 is the cause or result of warming/cooling temperatures. Also no one knows how much is needed to change temps if it even causes a change at all. And then no one knows how other things in nature will react as a result. We are not the warmest ever. And and we are not the coolest ever. The earth has been warmer before man. CO2 levels have been higher before man. And these people love to ignore the impact of volcanic activity on the climate. Those things do much more than man ever could.

These people for the most part are frauds. They altered the report given in Kyoto AFTER the review process which to me should result in their credentials being stripped. They knowingly report false and misleading data simply to get you to write them a check. There is no integrity with this group.

hrmm.. someone ought to call National Geographic then, cause their latest cover story is about global warming and the article seems to say there's pretty convincing evidence rising co2 emissions are a factor in global warming...

-koji K.

Ask yourself this. What is convincing? And another key word is "factor". Gravity was a factor in the collapse of the WTC towers. But it wasn't the cause. Gun powder is a factor in the deaths of all shooting victims. But it isn't the cause. Not paying my credit card bill last month was a factor in not getting a home loan today but it wasn't the cause. (lol thats just an example.. I didn't apply for a loan)

See my point?

Temperature impacts plant life which impacts the rate of photosynthesis. This of course impacts CO2 levels. Hot temperatures often translate to fires. Fires burn greenery. Less greenery equals less photosynthesis. You see the trend. Also the chemistry of the ocean is a big deal. There is alot of algae in the ocean that plays a big roll as well. Lets not forget that its more likely for the oceans to impact the climate than man. Just look at el nino and its been around since before the industrial age.

What difference does it make? Whether it is a natural occurrence or man made greenhouse effect. The simple truth is that it is occurring and will destroy civilization as we know it. After all our civilization is based on ocean access and all our ports and inland waterways are about to be inundated in relatively short time.
As care takers of this planet is it not our responsibility to exercise every means at our disposal to avert this calamity. If not to save the planet, to save our cultures and civilization.
Please stop trying to assess blame or responsibility and let us band together and accomplish solution. Is that not what makes us superior in the animal kingdom.

Kill me if I am Wrong.

TUT

Originally posted by Indy
koji_K... MONEY.

That's right, caring environment costs for corporations!
So to make more profit they move plants to countries where they don't have to care so much about environment. (or about safety of employees)

The earth has been warmer before man. CO2 levels have been higher before man.

Yep... like after Chixculub.

And these people love to ignore the impact of volcanic activity on the climate. Those things do much more than man ever could.

Amount of CO2 emissions from volcanoes is miniscule compared to what mankind spews to sky.
Actually bigger eruptions cause colder weather because of volcanic ash and dust and aerosol particles they produce.


And if warming isn't human caused there's no reason to accelerate it/destabilize climate. Climate isn't linear system, even a small change in "start values" can drive it to haywire mode, that's why forecasting weather for longer times than couple days is hard.
Like here in Finland at July when weather models forecasted long lasting blocking high pressure area but then came small low pressure from south-east and dumbed models down from toilet.

There is absolutely NOTHING you can do about natural causes. That is why people have cooked up a story to blame it on man. This creates a villan. There simply is no truth to the claim that man is responsible for climate change. We are insignificant on this planet and we change nothing. A single volcanic erruption can produce more pollution than man can in a year. Global warming as the IPCC plays out is simply a scam. Acting on any part of it is silly in my opinion. We are simply riding a natural cycle in the climate. It goes up. It goes down. It has before us and it will after us. Nothing will change that.

E_T.. I don't know where you come up with volcanos putting on miniscule amounts of CO2 compared to man. There simply is no basis for that. They Mayon volcano is a perfect example. It expelled an incredible amount of CO2 and nothing happened. The driver for our climate is the ocean. Not man. Short of a nuclear war we aren't changing a thing.

A clear correlation exists between certain
types of major eruptions and short-term climate character. As
demonstrated for recent eruptions, global-average surface temperature
declined by 0.2�C - 0.3�C for one to three years following a
major eruption.
www.pages.unibe.ch...

And read little about Tambora's eruption... or Toba.

"Normal smoking" of volcanoes doesn't affect climate because amount of gases are so small.

www.specialedprep.net...

While I don't believe we are causing "global warming" that is still no excuse to dump toxins into the environment. Humanity needs to take care of the world and not abuse it. While I don't think CO2 is causing problems there are other things that are, like poaching. But that's a whole different topic isn't it.

Actually I know quite a bit about Toba and Tambora. Toba was the largest ever and Tambora was the one that created the famous year without a summer. The cooling is not caused by the gases but rather atmospheric dust.

Originally posted by Indy
Toba was the largest ever and Tambora was the one that created the famous year without a summer. The cooling is not caused by the gases but rather atmospheric dust.

Well, definitely not largest.
Basalt eruptions in Deccan and Siberia both spewed out millions cubic kilometers of magma. (Deccan eruption happened 65 million years ago... in antipodal point of Chixculub)

The Permian ended 251 million years ago, at the same time the huge Siberian flood basalts formed. These lava flows are not quite as voluminous as the Deccan lavas that erupted at the Cretaceous-Tertiary boundary. Their volume is a mere 1.5 million cubic kilometers versus 8 million for the Deccan. Nevertheless, if spread evenly on the surface of the Earth, they would make a layer about 30 centimeters thick. You'd be up to your knees in lava.
www.psrd.hawaii.edu...


Dust stays only months in atmosphere (same was calculated for dust rised by cosmic impacts) but aerosol particles stays years in there, and volcanoes spew out huge amounts of sulfur oxides.

vulcan.wr.usgs.gov...
vulcan.wr.usgs.gov...
environmentalet.hypermart.net...
calspace.ucsd.edu...

Magma flow isn't a big deal. Well it is if you are in the path. You can put out all the magma you want. The explosion its what gets you. Like with Toba and Yellowstone. And dust can stay in the atmosphere for quite a bit longer. It all depends on how far into the atmosphere it gets. Look at the impact that supposedly killed the dinosaurs (if the impact actually happened). The dust cloud was assumed to have darkened the skies for an incredible period of time. And the impact of aerosols is certainly debatable. The information on the climate impact is contaminated much as the info on CO2 is. There is a political agenda behind that as well. Back in the 70's man was being blamed for bring on global cooling an a potential ice age because of aerosols. Of course these same idiots say that man is now causing global warming because of CO2. And when that ends up being wrong they'll find something else to blame man for. Its all about extorting money from governments.

Originally posted by Indy
And dust can stay in the atmosphere for quite a bit longer. It all depends on how far into the atmosphere it gets. Look at the impact that supposedly killed the dinosaurs (if the impact actually happened). The dust cloud was assumed to have darkened the skies for an incredible period of time.

Larger dust particles can't stay long in air, only smaller particles can stay years in atmosphere.
And cosmic impacts surely rise stuff more higher than any volcano.

After all it really wouldn't matter does it stay couple monts or year in there after big impact.
www.space.com...

Explosive eruptions aren't required for emission of gases, like eruptions in Iceland.
volcano.und.nodak.edu...
volcano.und.edu...

volcano.und.edu...

Originally posted by Indy
"There is absolutely NOTHING you can do about natural causes. That is why people have cooked up a story to blame it on man. This creates a villan. ... Global warming as the IPCC plays out is simply a scam."

It used to be that when a severe weather disaster occurred, insurance companies/banks/government funds paid for deaths and damage because these events were considered to be an "act of God". However, God doesn't write checks, so the insurance companies/banks/government funds lost money.

Then along came the environmentalist with some exaggerated claims of how a scant 0.038% of carbon dioxide and some additional "greenhouse gases" were causing a climate catastrophe, mostly from mankind's doing.

And the insurance companies/banks/governments thought this was good. Not only can names be attached to the disasters, but names with checking accounts. Names from "wealthy" nations where energy is cheap and consumed in abundance. If God can't reimburse those insurance companies/banks/governments, then those nasty western polluters can. And they realized that more profit was to be found in the scam of trading "carbon credits".

The framework is now being built make you pay... and pay.. and pay.