It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Okay folks...I give up. The argument on both sides is unwinable. This whole argument mainly focuses around carbon emissions, but my true concern is methane and hydrogen sulfide gas.
The fact is that Anthropogenic Global Warming/Climate Change is being attributed by most AGW scientists to anthropogenic CO2 emissions, and not to methane.
Also, in one of your responses you sided with a member who ridiculed those of us who believe AGW is a hoax, or did you not?...
As to methane emissions what do you think are the causes of them?
And again, why is it that there are, and have been world record COLD/WINTERS if methane is heating the planet?edit on 11-1-2014 by ElectricUniverse because: (no reason given)
Can you show me what you're talking about here...where I sided with who?
If there are these record cold winters can you show us the data that shows that, rather than one record cold day, can you show how over the long term, these are record cold winters.
reply to post by ElectricUniverse
Yea, but you know what they were all missing?
The use of coal, gas, and petroleum.
Quite the difference, don't ya think?
reply to post by ElectricUniverse
Oh I get it, you're playing stupid, in a passive-aggressive move.
I don't like to mess with fools.
You enjoy sucking up that propaganda, though.edit on 11-1-2014 by webedoomed because: (no reason given)
Current climate change is altering the ecosystem. For example - insects living in places too cold to live before - impacting animal and plant species without immunities against them. Or creating situations where disease has more of an opportunity to mutate/spread among different species. The smallest life forms on earth affect those higher up (fungus as an example). When ice melts it rains and rain with warmer temperatures provide a breeding ground for such conditions.
The planet is warming and whether that leads to an eventual cooling I have no clue but a cold few days or even a cold winter cannot refute the long term data that we are warmer over the past dozen years. What is "has been" versus "where its going" are two different things so I refer to it as climate change since its disputable what it will be like 5 years down the road.
Climate in northern Europe reconstructed for the past 2,000 years: Cooling trend calculated precisely for the first time
Calculations prepared by Mainz scientists will also influence the way current climate change is perceived / Publication of results in Nature Climate Change
An international team including scientists from Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz (JGU) has published a reconstruction of the climate in northern Europe over the last 2,000 years based on the information provided by tree-rings. Professor Dr. Jan Esper's group at the Institute of Geography at JGU used tree-ring density measurements from sub-fossil pine trees originating from Finnish Lapland to produce a reconstruction reaching back to 138 BC. In so doing, the researchers have been able for the first time to precisely demonstrate that the long-term trend over the past two millennia has been towards climatic cooling. "We found that previous estimates of historical temperatures during the Roman era and the Middle Ages were too low," says Esper. "Such findings are also significant with regard to climate policy, as they will influence the way today's climate changes are seen in context of historical warm periods." The new study has been published in the journal Nature Climate Change.
Was the climate during Roman and Medieval times warmer than today? And why are these earlier warm periods important when assessing the global climate changes we are experiencing today? The discipline of paleoclimatology attempts to answer such questions. Scientists analyze indirect evidence of climate variability, such as ice cores and ocean sediments, and so reconstruct the climate of the past. The annual growth rings in trees are the most important witnesses over the past 1,000 to 2,000 years as they indicate how warm and cool past climate conditions were.
Researchers from Germany, Finland, Scotland, and Switzerland examined tree-ring density profiles in trees from Finnish Lapland. In this cold environment, trees often collapse into one of the numerous lakes, where they remain well preserved for thousands of years.
The international research team used these density measurements from sub-fossil pine trees in northern Scandinavia to create a sequence reaching back to 138 BC. The density measurements correlate closely with the summer temperatures in this area on the edge of the Nordic taiga. The researchers were thus able to create a temperature reconstruction of unprecedented quality. The reconstruction provides a high-resolution representation of temperature patterns in the Roman and Medieval Warm periods, but also shows the cold phases that occurred during the Migration Period and the later Little Ice Age.
In addition to the cold and warm phases, the new climate curve also exhibits a phenomenon that was not expected in this form. For the first time, researchers have now been able to use the data derived from tree-rings to precisely calculate a much longer-term cooling trend that has been playing out over the past 2,000 years. Their findings demonstrate that this trend involves a cooling of -0.3°C per millennium due to gradual changes to the position of the sun and an increase in the distance between the Earth and the sun.
I like how NASA refers to it as the planets vital signs. If we watch what's happening we can understand where we may be headed since it will impact at least some life on the planet (all interconnected).
reply to post by Agit8dChop
Its arrogant to think we have more control over the weather then the cosmic ebbs and flow of the universe.
i think it's arrogant to think that we can just do what we want to this living breathing planet and not face some repercussions.
reply to post by webedoomed
The catastropic impacts on animals and weather that may be happening now, man made or not, happened many times before as climate always changes and those things are normal. Mass extinctions, vastly variable weather and regional changes in rainfall and temps all are normal and happened many times. Consider that the oceans in ice ages (remember that for 90% of the last million years) are 200-300 feet lower than now, plus who knows at what temps. As we go into an ice age this kind of stuff happens and its very severe. Oceans up and down many times by hundreds of feet, no doubt the origin in most cultural myths of the primordial floods as it is in our collective unconscious.
Yes we are affecting climate now, but even if we adopt radical changes to have no influence- the climate will change radically on its own and be just as devastating from whatever causes ice ages. It wasn't that long ago that our ancestors lived in an ice age, many flips from warm to cold, and back to warm, over and over, for millions of years. Many species suffered in the transition stages until a new stabilization was reached, but it never stays stable. Bet when it flipped in the past back to colder many times people were freaking out just as some are doing now.
We can not stop climate change, we need to prepare to live though it, and we don't want quick change, also we can't have 6 -7 billion people survive in total made-made environments. We will need other places to live and self-contained living zones even if there were no impact on climates by human activities. The climate will turn against us no matter what. Yes its good to understand it, that is the first step and we are not there yet.edit on 12-1-2014 by retsdeeps1 because: (no reason given)
What in the world are you talking about now?... You should learn to make an intelligent and concise argument if you want to be taken seriously.
The release of anthropogenic CO2 includes the emissions from gas, coal, and other petroleum products, yet you seem to think that this isn't being taken into account which shows your lack of knowledge on the subject.
Not only that but you resort to using insults, which again shows that you have no valid argument at all.
And you're 'just sayin' it correctly. The whole point..."North America freezes doesn't prove there is no global warming"
North America - cold
Europe - warm
Eurasia - warm
Asia - warm
Australia - warm
Africa - warm
Alaska - warm
South America...not sure, haven't checked lately.
The April 30, 2012 New York Times article included the comments of several other experts. Christopher S. Bretherton, an atmospheric researcher at the University of Washington, said Lindzen is "feeding upon an audience that wants to hear a certain message, and wants to hear it put forth by people with enough scientific reputation that it can be sustained for a while, even if it’s wrong science. I don’t think it’s intellectually honest at all." Kerry A. Emanuel, another M.I.T. scientist, said of Lindzen's views "Even if there were no political implications, it just seems deeply unprofessional and irresponsible to look at this and say, ‘We’re sure it’s not a problem.’ It’s a special kind of risk, because it’s a risk to the collective civilization."