Another look at global warming and wacky weather

  1. 1 http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2012/...ather-wackier/
  2. Enjoy this?

    Join thousands and get our weekly Nursing Insights newsletter with the hottest discussions, articles, and toons.


  3. Visit  tntrn profile page

    About tntrn

    tntrn has '34' year(s) of experience and specializes in 'L & D; Postpartum'. From 'Washington'; 66 Years Old; Joined Nov '99; Posts: 8,494; Likes: 11,165.

    197 Comments so far...

  4. Visit  Tweety profile page
    0
    I think it's probably going to take 100 years or more to look back and decide what the effects were. I suppose it's at least an accomplishment that they acknowledge that CO2 has increased, even if they are willing to gamble the future. Too bad, we should be the leader in mending what we've destroyed.


    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1446460.html
  5. Visit  azhiker96 profile page
    4
    Quote from Tweety
    I think it's probably going to take 100 years or more to look back and decide what the effects were.
    Possibly in 100 years for consensus? I think you're an optimist.

    In any case, considering prehistoric levels of CO2 were 10 times higher than today's level I think the Earth will survive. Of course, it might only be populated by cockroaches and a few survivalists high in the mountains. ;-)
    Jolie, Purple_Scrubs, Spidey's mom, and 1 other like this.
  6. Visit  heron profile page
    1
    A somewhat different view from a fellow conservative/Republican:

    Shawn Lawrence Otto | A Message from a Republican Meteorologist on Climate Change
    My climate epiphany wasn't overnight, and it had nothing to do with Al Gore. In the mid-90s I noticed gradual changes in the weather patterns floating over Minnesota. Curious, I began investigating climate science, and, over time, began to see the thumbprint of climate change, along with 97% of published, peer-reviewed PhD's, who link a 40% spike in greenhouse gases with a warmer, stormier atmosphere.

    Bill O'Reilly, whom I respect, talks of a "no-spin zone." Yet today there's a very concerted, well-funded effort to spin climate science. Some companies, institutes and think tanks are cherry-picking data, planting dubious seeds of doubt, arming professional deniers, scientists-for-hire and skeptical bloggers with the ammunition necessary to keep climate confusion alive. It's the "you can't prove smoking cigarettes causes lung cancer!" argument, times 100, with many of the same players. Amazing.

    Schopenhauer said "All truth goes through three stages. First it is ridiculed. Then it is violently opposed. Finally it is accepted as self-evident." We are now well into Stage 2. It's getting bloody out there. Climate scientists are receiving death threats and many Americans don't know what to believe. Some turn to talk radio or denial-blogs for their climate information. No wonder they're confused.

    ... What I keep coming back to is this: all those dire (alarmist!) warnings from climate scientists 30 years ago? They're coming true, one after another - and faster than supercomputer models predicted. Data shows 37 years/row of above-average temperatures, worldwide. My state has warmed by at least 3 degrees F. Climate change is either "The Mother of All Coincidences" - or the trends are real.
    The article in the OP makes the mistake of conflating climate with weather, among other things.

    Frankly, I'm no more impressed by Fox's "science" reporting than I am by their political or social reporting. Lott is a TV producer, for heaven's sake! Certainly no dummy, but hardly an expert of any kind on weather or climate. The only thing he's proven is that catastrophic weather can happen regardless of the long-term dynamics of the climate.
    herring_RN likes this.
  7. Visit  tntrn profile page
    2
    The writer cites an expert under most of the categories and the others are historical in nature.My point in posting this is that not all experts agree with Al Gore, who isn't a scientist either and a lot of he's predicted hasn't come to pass or has been disproved. There are always two sides to a story.
    Jolie and VivaLasViejas like this.
  8. Visit  Tweety profile page
    1
    Quote from tntrn
    The writer cites an expert under most of the categories and the others are historical in nature.My point in posting this is that not all experts agree with Al Gore, who isn't a scientist either and a lot of he's predicted hasn't come to pass or has been disproved. There are always two sides to a story.
    No one can disclaim that the worst weather has occurred in the past and remotely and the article you posted is truthful. Still, I think we need to wait more than just a couple of years before deciding it's quackery. Like it said, it might be many decades before any of the predictions come true. Although the "sky is falling" mentality is annoying, it's kind of like our problems with the national debt, this country just wants to ignore any future problems while the train just keeps on running heading for the cliff.
    herring_RN likes this.
  9. Visit  Elvish profile page
    2
    Quote from azhiker96
    In any case, considering prehistoric levels of CO2 were 10 times higher than today's level I think the Earth will survive. Of course, it might only be populated by cockroaches and a few survivalists high in the mountains. ;-)
    And Keith Richards.

    Sorry for being irreverent in what is otherwise a serious thread.
    Medic2RN and herring_RN like this.
  10. Visit  herring_RN profile page
    0
    Quote from Elvish
    And Keith Richards.

    Sorry for being irreverent in what is otherwise a serious thread.
    Keith Richards is just one year older than I am.
    He is very fortunate to have survived so long. I'd have expired years ago with his life style.
    I heard him on TV say he had to give up drugs or go to prison and lose his music. (yes I could understand his speech)
    He is an amazing guitarist. He can look so "out of it' and then come in right on time with the perfect lick.
  11. Visit  tntrn profile page
    1
    Quote from Tweety
    No one can disclaim that the worst weather has occurred in the past and remotely and the article you posted is truthful. Still, I think we need to wait more than just a couple of years before deciding it's quackery. Like it said, it might be many decades before any of the predictions come true. Although the "sky is falling" mentality is annoying, it's kind of like our problems with the national debt, this country just wants to ignore any future problems while the train just keeps on running heading for the cliff.
    And by that same logic we should not accept as the gospel after just a couple of years either.
    Jolie likes this.
  12. Visit  herring_RN profile page
    1
    more like a couple of centuries:
    here are gathered in chronological sequence the most important events in the history of climate change science from 1800 to 2009 - global warming timeline
    Last edit by herring_RN on May 1, '12
    leslie :-D likes this.
  13. Visit  heron profile page
    1
    Quote from tntrn
    The writer cites an expert under most of the categories and the others are historical in nature.My point in posting this is that not all experts agree with Al Gore, who isn't a scientist either and a lot of he's predicted hasn't come to pass or has been disproved. There are always two sides to a story.
    What's Al Gore got to do with anything?

    The whole article is one long non sequitur, in my opinion. The author's argument is that catastrophic weather occurred before human societies began frantically pumping waste into the atmosphere, therefore greenhouse gasses have no effect on climate which isn't changing anyway.

    A bit like saying that people died of lung disease before we started smoking tobacco and besides, my grampa lived to 98 smoking a pack a day, therefore tobacco is harmless and lung cancer doesn't exist.

    Thirty years ago, we thought we had plenty of time ... a hundred years at least ... before we would start to see big changes. We were wrong. Predictions are coming true now.

    Small Island, High Mountain States Plead for Climate Action
    ..."The Maldives, as a low-lying small island state, is particularly vulnerable to the perils of global climate change, a point brought sharply into focus by the recent sea swells which submerged a large part of the country," said the Indian Ocean nation's Foreign Minister Abdulla Shahid.

    ..."More serious and more immediate" is the speed at which Himalayan glaciers are receding, Bhutan's Foreign Minister Yeshey Dorji told the delegates. Bhutan's agricultural sector, the mainstay of nearly 80 percent of the population, is at risk.
    Spring runoff is an important source of agricultural water ... and not just in Bhutan.

    http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/jun2...-06-21-01.html
    A deadly trio of factors - warming, acidification and lack of oxygen - is creating the conditions associated with every previous major extinction of species in Earth's history, the panel warned.



    The combined effects of these stressors are causing degeneration in the ocean that is "far faster than anyone has predicted," the scientists report.

    ...The group reviewed recent research by world ocean experts and found firm evidence that the effects of climate change, coupled with other human-induced impacts such as over-fishing and nutrient run-off from farming, have already caused a dramatic decline in ocean health.

    ...Dan Laffoley, marine chair of IUCN's World Commission on Protected Areas and senior ddvisor on Marine Science and Conservation for IUCN, and co-author of the report, said, "The world's leading experts on oceans are surprised by the rate and magnitude of changes we are seeing. The challenges for the future of the ocean are vast, but unlike previous generations we know what now needs to happen. The time to protect the blue heart of our planet is now, today and urgent."
    Where do you suppose a significant part of our oxygen comes from?

    It's time to stop obsessing over Al Gore and start thinking about whether your grandchildren will be able to eat or breathe.
    Elvish likes this.
  14. Visit  tntrn profile page
    1
    The Earth Day people in 1970 (?) were predicting an ice age that would have already decimated the planet......and it would appear they were very very wrong. The same might be said of those predicting we will melt, also.
    Jolie likes this.
  15. Visit  heron profile page
    2
    Quote from tntrn
    The Earth Day people in 1970 (?) were predicting an ice age that would have already decimated the planet......and it would appear they were very very wrong. The same might be said of those predicting we will melt, also.
    It's all about context, isn't it?
    What were climate scientists predicting in the 1970s?

    At the same time as some scientists were suggesting we might be facing another ice age, a greater number published contradicting studies. Their papers showed that the growing amount of greenhouse gasses that humans were putting into the atmosphere would cause much greater warming - warming that would a much greater influence on global temperature than any possible natural or human-caused cooling effects.

    By 1980 the predictions about ice ages had ceased, due to the overwhelming evidence contained in an increasing number of reports that warned of global warming. Unfortunately, the small number of predictions of an ice age appeared to be much more interesting than those of global warming, so it was those sensational 'Ice Age' stories in the press that so many people tend to remember.

    ...The fact is that around 1970 there were 6 times as many scientists predicting a warming rather than a cooling planet. Today, with 30+years more data to analyse, we've reached a clear scientific consensus: 97% of working climate scientists agree with the view that human beings are causing global warming.
    What were climate scientists predicting in the 1970s?


    Tweety and herring_RN like this.


Nursing Jobs in every specialty and state. Visit today and Create Job Alerts, Manage Your Resume, and Apply for Jobs.

Top