Global Warming

MJM · 03-25-2006, 03:21 PM

Back in the late 40's, scientists were so concerned with the Earth's COOLING, that they were investigating possible ways to enhance melting of the polar ice caps (e.g. spread dark soot over the ice). And that was after scientists 80 years prior to that had been concerned about the Earth's WARMING....

It's all a cycle, perfectly natural, and of such massive proportions us little old humans have little or no impact on it.

ApS · 03-29-2006, 06:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MJM

It's all a cycle, perfectly natural, and of such massive proportions us little old humans have little or no impact on it.

Still, global warming is fact.

In a warming cycle, there are 6 Billion of us setting forests on fire for agriculture, igniting underground coal deposits, burning grasslands, igniting oilfields, heating homes, illuminating the night skies, "flaring" gas, "over-transporting", and cutting forests to assist the progress of lightning-caused fires and the "usual" volcanoes. (Excepting nuclear power generation, all increase carbon dioxide levels, making a "heating loop" for Mother Earth).

Should we be in a cooling "cycle" instead, this may only be a 200-year "blip" of warming. A Winnipesaukee shed, built near me post-war, had 2x6s on 12-inch centers.

(For the snow load—who knew?)

Quote:

Originally Posted by MJM

Back in the late 40's, scientists were so concerned with the Earth's COOLING, that they were investigating possible ways to enhance melting of the polar ice caps (e.g. spread dark soot over the ice). And that was after scientists 80 years prior to that had been concerned about the Earth's WARMING....

Satellites monitoring the oceans' heights and "computer-modeling" have changed they way we look at weather and climate.

Of course, government grants to universities keep things hopping, too!

Airwaves · 03-29-2006, 10:39 PM

Quote:

APS wrote:
Don't you have that backwards?

The criss-crossing of commercial air traffic's wispy "contrails" reflect the sun's energy back into space, just as those "wispy" cirrus clouds do. When the contrails disappeared post-9/11, the Earth should have warmed up!

If I recall, and it's been a week now since I heard the piece, the earth's radiational heat is reflected off clouds, contrails, etc and bounces back toward the ground helping to keep us warm, especially at night.

It's most noticable during the winter, the temperatures are lower on clear nights than on cloudy tonights during similar weather systems because the earth's heat is lost on a clear night with nothing to reflect it back.

You're local TV weatherdude calls it "radiational cooling". I was surprised to hear that there is enough air traffic over the US that would have had a radiational cooling effect when it wasn't there suddenly.

The type of clouds that would prevent the sun's rays from reaching and warming the earth to begin with would be something you'd find after catastrophic volcanic eruption or in the extreme, a nuclear winter.

Mee-n-Mac · 03-30-2006, 12:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Airwaves

If I recall, and it's been a week now since I heard the piece, the earth's radiational heat is reflected off clouds, contrails, etc and bounces back toward the ground helping to keep us warm, especially at night.

It's most noticable during the winter, the temperatures are lower on clear nights than on cloudy tonights during similar weather systems because the earth's heat is lost on a clear night with nothing to reflect it back.

You're local TV weatherdude calls it "radiational cooling". I was surprised to hear that there is enough air traffic over the US that would have had a radiational cooling effect when it wasn't there suddenly.

The type of clouds that would prevent the sun's rays from reaching and warming the earth to begin with would be something you'd find after catastrophic volcanic eruption or in the extreme, a nuclear winter.

First the article orignally mentioned by Airwaves only stated that increased differences between night and day temperatures were noted in the 3 days post 9/11. The author (David J. Travis, University of Wisconsin) made no conclusions as to whether the net effect was overall warming or cooling. Second the effect of contrails (and cloud cover) is to both reflect sunlight back into space (thus decreasing the Earth's temp) and to block IR from the ground and subsequently reradiate it back (thus increasing the Earth's temp). I've yet to see any definitive article stating which effect dominates; the numbers presented for both effects are within 1-2 % of each other. One report estimated that contrails would effect the Earth's temperature by 2050 but that made some ambitious assumptions concerning the growth of air traffic. http://www.agu.org/sci_soc/prrl/prrl9919.html

The effects of clouds (rather than contrails) is hotly debated right now. I don't know of anyone who claims that existing models for clouds are accurate.

ITD · 03-30-2006, 11:18 AM

http://news.rgj.com/apps/pbcs.dll/ar...603300345/1002

Grant · 03-30-2006, 11:51 AM

Read this week's TIME magazine cover story -- a real eye-opener on the global warming front.

Great Idea · 03-30-2006, 04:00 PM

I refrained from responding to the "World is flat" responses earlier in the thread because I knew the article from Time was coming out... we should all read it and look at some ways to work on the problem. Check out Greenland.... this is a real and serious issue that we are contributing to. Lets not be the generation remember as the consumer pigs who ignored the signs and kept using and abusing..... Clean fuels and energy are out there. Its all just supply and demand. If we start demanding it someone will start supplying it.

Grant · 03-30-2006, 04:42 PM

And if you all want examples -- beyond global warming -- that strike close to home, consider the changes in Winnipesaukee in recent years.

I've been on the Lake for all of my 44+ years, and have seen some very disturbing developments recently. Winni is a glacial lake, so it's been around a LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG time, yet in a relative nanosecond, we've trashed it. Look at the algae blooms that come each summer. NEVER saw that when I was a kid...or even a teen...or in my twenties...and I spent a LOT of time with a mask on. Turbidity has changed as well. The water to our house always has come from the Lake...and, up until the last ten years or so, that is what we drank (smart or not...). Today, it's strictly the bottled stuff. Beach closings at Weirs due to bacteria. MTBE from fuel spills. Mercury-tainted fish. Mifoil from other bodies of water. Zebra mussels. What a mess. And it's all from us, the troublesome species that wants it all and trashes it at the same time.

Crank up the global temp a degree or two, and things get really weird. Sorry for the rant.

Lakegeezer · 03-30-2006, 08:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grant

And if you all want examples -- beyond global warming -- that strike close to home, consider the changes in Winnipesaukee in recent years.

Well said Grant. I've only been on the lake for 25 years, but also notice significant changes. There seems to be 1000 points of change if you just look around a bit.

I've often wondered what those from 100-200 years ago, such as Ben Franklin and Edison would think of all the technology of 2000. At the same time, I wish I could see 200 years into the future and know what 2200 will be like. How much will the climate really change? If it is significant, what will the citizens of the earth have done about it?

VarneyPoint · 03-30-2006, 11:49 PM

I've tried to refrain from this debate but I do want to make one point. The people who do climate research have very little to gain from raising awareness on global warming. Do you really think that they are becoming rich off this stuff? Do you think they have a hidden agenda? Do you think climatologists run around saying "global warming is real," because they think it is fun??? The answer is no. A climatologist doesn't get rich by educating people about global warming. He or she doesn't become famous or ink a book deal. Nope, they live a normal, quiet life trying to do their small part, yet they get referred to as "tree huggers" or "liberals" or "whack-jobs," by people who know nothing about science and even less about climatology.

However, the people who vehemently deny that global warming is occuring, do have an agenda. They have a lot to lose in terms of money, power and influence.

I am not a tree hugger and I am not a liberal. But when I read that polar bears are being found drowned everywhere I get worried because polar bears didn't just forget how to swim and they certainly didn't forget that they belong on the ice. Ever stop to think why they are drowning?? Because they got caught on a piece of ice that breaks off a glacier and floats out to sea, melts, and the polar bear ends up so far from land that he drowns from exhaustion.

Wake up people, global warming is real. Is the complete and full truth known, no, of course not. As we continue to study it, we will learn more. But a lot is known and it all points to a problem right now and down the road.

Sorry for the long post, but some people are so closeminded. Is your personal existence threatened by someone with a Ph.D. (btw, having a Ph.D. means you pretty much know everything there is to know in your field) who works at a reputable university, does some experiments and publishes the results in a peer-reviewed journal?

ps- there is no proof that God exists either, but the majority of the people on the planet have no trouble with that one...

MAXUM · 03-31-2006, 09:41 AM

It's been estimated that the 1980's eruption of Mt St. Helens put more green house gases in the atmosphere than man has EVER put in the atmosphere in the modern era. Hmm better put filters on all those volcanos out there to make them more earth friendly when they erupt!

Enough said, I'd prefer my tax dollars that are spent studing "global warming" be either returned to me so I can spend it more wisely, or better yet take that money and develop alternate power sources that are useful. There is no dispute that we can do better than fossil fuels, so lets do it and quit wasting money trying to prove some dumb theory. I don't need to waste millions upon millions of dollars to know that pushing for new clean burning or alternative technologies is good for everyone, the earth included.

Grant · 03-31-2006, 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MAXUM

There is no dispute that we can do better than fossil fuels, so lets do it and quit wasting money trying to prove some dumb theory. I don't need to waste millions upon millions of dollars to know that pushing for new clean burning or alternative technologies is good for everyone, the earth included.

Well said. And now you'll have to excuse me -- I need to go fuel up my Suburban. Am I a hypocrite?

ITD · 03-31-2006, 01:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grant

Well said. And now you'll have to excuse me -- I need to go fuel up my Suburban. Am I a hypocrite?

Only if you have a "Mother Earth" bumper sticker on it.

Grant · 03-31-2006, 02:02 PM

What if I'm fueling it with BioDiesel?

Are there enough french fry joints in the Lakes Region to fill my 30 gallon tank?

If not, y'all better belly up to the counter and satisfy yer RDA for GREASE!

BioDiesel...noble cause...but it seems that the primary emission, water vapor, is also a chief GREENHOUSE EFFECT contributor.

I'm confused...

SIKSUKR · 03-31-2006, 02:59 PM

Thanks for the voice of reason Maxum.I said it in an earlier post and I''ll say it again,global warming may very well be occuring.That catchy phrase "global warming" is a hot buzzword now but that's not the issue.The debate is whether it's man-made or a natural occurance,or the combination of both.I don't know how you can measure temp. change over the last 100+ years and conclude this is manmade.The earth is how many millions or billion years old?We have had numerous radical climate changes hot and cold way before man arrived on this planet.I love polar bears too but just because they are drowning does mean it is at the hands of a manmade climate change.

jeffk · 03-31-2006, 05:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VarneyPoint

I've tried to refrain from this debate but I do want to make one point. The people who do climate research have very little to gain from raising awareness on global warming. Do you really think that they are becoming rich off this stuff? Do you think they have a hidden agenda? Do you think climatologists run around saying "global warming is real," because they think it is fun??? The answer is no. A climatologist doesn't get rich by educating people about global warming. He or she doesn't become famous or ink a book deal. Nope, they live a normal, quiet life trying to do their small part, yet they get referred to as "tree huggers" or "liberals" or "whack-jobs," by people who know nothing about science and even less about climatology.

However, the people who vehemently deny that global warming is occuring, do have an agenda. They have a lot to lose in terms of money, power and influence.

The people who study these issues certainly do have a lot at stake. They have built up a very large industry to push their point of view. Vast amounts of funding is at stake for both research and marketing. If they can't "prove" their point the funding dries up and their jobs go away. There is also a lot of prestige associated with these positions. I don't think they are necessarily dishonest but they are biased and they are certainly not disinterested parties.

The businesses and others that are questioning the global warming theory are asking for reasonable proof that 1) global warming IS happening to a degree that it could be harmful 2) man IS adding significantly to the warming effect 3) proposed changes WOULD BE EFFECTIVE in significantly reducing the warming effect.

It is known that the proposed "fixes" would have severe worldwide economic consequences. Yet, as far as I know, no one has produced a climate model that correctly models the changes in climate over the past few decades. The experts are still guessing as to why the changes that they have been able to measure have happened. Once we have a model that has some level of confidence we might be able to project into the future and decide if there really is a problem that we can do something about and if we want to accept the economic impacts that might be required to fix it.

MAXUM · 03-30-2006, 04:48 PM

LOL what a bunch of garbage. Opening statement says it all...

No one can say exactly what it looks like when a planet takes ill, but it probably looks a lot like Earth.

Really.... because all the other planets in our solar system are looking like such better alternatives to earth to live on right? Great lets take all these tree huggers and ship them off to pluto! Enjoy your stay on a healthy planet! Notice how these "intellectual" people site global warming as a scientific "fact", even though the theory has been around for a while yet never has been proven. Let's talk fact, and the fact is that man has had NO proven effect on the temperature of the globe hence the reason why this is still a theory and probably always will be. Earth was a much warmer place before the ice age, who was to blame back then? How about global cooling...Oh yeah that evil killer asteroid that said EXXON on the side of it right? See back billions of years ago the "big oil" Neanderthals that are to blame! Crash the planet's climate into a cold state where everyone will need oil and gas to keep warm.

Please, I'm all for conservation and newer clean burning technologies, and of course exploiting natural forms of energy, but where are these people when it comes to defending that wind farm off the MA south shore? Oh that's right, not in my back yard. They way you give up your SUV but keep your hands off mine.

ITD · 03-30-2006, 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MAXUM

Please, I'm all for conservation and newer clean burning technologies, and of course exploiting natural forms of energy, but where are these people when it comes to defending that wind farm off the MA south shore? Oh that's right, not in my back yard. They way you give up your SUV but keep your hands off mine.

Red hill and the other hills around the lake would be perfect for wind farms. Think of the amount of fossil fuels we would save.

Oh well, when politicians like Al Gore (the inventor of the internet

)start making speeches about doom day due to global warming my BS meter goes haywire.

There are enough serious problems with the "hockey stick" graph to make any expert who says global warming due to human use of fossil fuels is a fact suspect.

Time is trying to sell magazines, and this week I'm sure they did very well.

trfour · 03-30-2006, 06:49 PM

The scientists can't seem to agree on global warming! Don't let's get any politicians involved in this topic.

Politicians and diapers both need changing, and for the same reason.

Airwaves · 03-30-2006, 07:02 PM

This is pretty much my last comment (maybe) on this topic because I don't have the knowledge needed to carry on an intelligent conversation on this subject.

I am not a scientist. Not even close!

However, a vast majority of scientists who study such things, and devote their lives to this subject, believe our current way of living (our meaning the human race not just Americans) is having a severe impact on our planet.

I have seen photos of the ice melt on the polar caps. Again, these scientists say while those ice melts are cyclical, the fact that they are so dramatic in such a short period is alarming.

Do I consider myself a tree hugger? No, I drive an SUV. However I am open minded enough to consider what the folks who know much more than I know, might be right.

The U-S Govt says the issue needs more study. I ask you, who do you trust, a politician who needs more study (and needs to fundraise to be re-elected) or a scientist who has devoted his/her life and career to this topic (and needs grants to continue the research).

Remember, once people thought the world was flat and the Earth was the center of the Universe.

03-30-2006, 11:18 AM	#5
ITD Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Moultonboro, NH Posts: 2,928 Thanks: 476 Thanked 691 Times in 387 Posts	Another sign of global warming???? http://news.rgj.com/apps/pbcs.dll/ar...603300345/1002

03-30-2006, 11:51 AM	#6
Grant Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Pennsyltuckey, Tuftonboro, Moultonborough Posts: 1,500 Thanks: 375 Thanked 230 Times in 124 Posts	TIME Story Read this week's TIME magazine cover story -- a real eye-opener on the global warming front. __________________ "When I die, please don't let my wife sell my dive gear for what I told her I paid for it."

03-30-2006, 04:00 PM	#7
Great Idea Member Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 38 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Thank you TIME..... I refrained from responding to the "World is flat" responses earlier in the thread because I knew the article from Time was coming out... we should all read it and look at some ways to work on the problem. Check out Greenland.... this is a real and serious issue that we are contributing to. Lets not be the generation remember as the consumer pigs who ignored the signs and kept using and abusing..... Clean fuels and energy are out there. Its all just supply and demand. If we start demanding it someone will start supplying it.

03-30-2006, 04:42 PM	#8
Grant Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Pennsyltuckey, Tuftonboro, Moultonborough Posts: 1,500 Thanks: 375 Thanked 230 Times in 124 Posts	And if you all want examples -- beyond global warming -- that strike close to home, consider the changes in Winnipesaukee in recent years. I've been on the Lake for all of my 44+ years, and have seen some very disturbing developments recently. Winni is a glacial lake, so it's been around a LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG time, yet in a relative nanosecond, we've trashed it. Look at the algae blooms that come each summer. NEVER saw that when I was a kid...or even a teen...or in my twenties...and I spent a LOT of time with a mask on. Turbidity has changed as well. The water to our house always has come from the Lake...and, up until the last ten years or so, that is what we drank (smart or not...). Today, it's strictly the bottled stuff. Beach closings at Weirs due to bacteria. MTBE from fuel spills. Mercury-tainted fish. Mifoil from other bodies of water. Zebra mussels. What a mess. And it's all from us, the troublesome species that wants it all and trashes it at the same time. Crank up the global temp a degree or two, and things get really weird. Sorry for the rant. __________________ "When I die, please don't let my wife sell my dive gear for what I told her I paid for it."

03-31-2006, 02:02 PM	#14
Grant Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Pennsyltuckey, Tuftonboro, Moultonborough Posts: 1,500 Thanks: 375 Thanked 230 Times in 124 Posts	What if I'm fueling it with BioDiesel? Are there enough french fry joints in the Lakes Region to fill my 30 gallon tank? If not, y'all better belly up to the counter and satisfy yer RDA for GREASE! BioDiesel...noble cause...but it seems that the primary emission, water vapor, is also a chief GREENHOUSE EFFECT contributor. I'm confused... __________________ "When I die, please don't let my wife sell my dive gear for what I told her I paid for it."

03-25-2006, 03:21 PM	#1
MJM Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 262 Thanks: 0 Thanked 23 Times in 11 Posts	Back in the late 40's, scientists were so concerned with the Earth's COOLING, that they were investigating possible ways to enhance melting of the polar ice caps (e.g. spread dark soot over the ice). And that was after scientists 80 years prior to that had been concerned about the Earth's WARMING.... It's all a cycle, perfectly natural, and of such massive proportions us little old humans have little or no impact on it.

03-30-2006, 11:49 PM	#10
VarneyPoint Junior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: MA Posts: 18 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	I've tried to refrain from this debate but I do want to make one point. The people who do climate research have very little to gain from raising awareness on global warming. Do you really think that they are becoming rich off this stuff? Do you think they have a hidden agenda? Do you think climatologists run around saying "global warming is real," because they think it is fun??? The answer is no. A climatologist doesn't get rich by educating people about global warming. He or she doesn't become famous or ink a book deal. Nope, they live a normal, quiet life trying to do their small part, yet they get referred to as "tree huggers" or "liberals" or "whack-jobs," by people who know nothing about science and even less about climatology. However, the people who vehemently deny that global warming is occuring, do have an agenda. They have a lot to lose in terms of money, power and influence. I am not a tree hugger and I am not a liberal. But when I read that polar bears are being found drowned everywhere I get worried because polar bears didn't just forget how to swim and they certainly didn't forget that they belong on the ice. Ever stop to think why they are drowning?? Because they got caught on a piece of ice that breaks off a glacier and floats out to sea, melts, and the polar bear ends up so far from land that he drowns from exhaustion. Wake up people, global warming is real. Is the complete and full truth known, no, of course not. As we continue to study it, we will learn more. But a lot is known and it all points to a problem right now and down the road. Sorry for the long post, but some people are so closeminded. Is your personal existence threatened by someone with a Ph.D. (btw, having a Ph.D. means you pretty much know everything there is to know in your field) who works at a reputable university, does some experiments and publishes the results in a peer-reviewed journal? ps- there is no proof that God exists either, but the majority of the people on the planet have no trouble with that one...

03-31-2006, 09:41 AM	#11
MAXUM Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Kuna ID Posts: 2,755 Thanks: 246 Thanked 1,942 Times in 802 Posts	It's been estimated that the 1980's eruption of Mt St. Helens put more green house gases in the atmosphere than man has EVER put in the atmosphere in the modern era. Hmm better put filters on all those volcanos out there to make them more earth friendly when they erupt! Enough said, I'd prefer my tax dollars that are spent studing "global warming" be either returned to me so I can spend it more wisely, or better yet take that money and develop alternate power sources that are useful. There is no dispute that we can do better than fossil fuels, so lets do it and quit wasting money trying to prove some dumb theory. I don't need to waste millions upon millions of dollars to know that pushing for new clean burning or alternative technologies is good for everyone, the earth included.

03-31-2006, 02:59 PM	#15
SIKSUKR Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 5,075 Thanks: 215 Thanked 903 Times in 509 Posts	Thanks for the voice of reason Maxum.I said it in an earlier post and I''ll say it again,global warming may very well be occuring.That catchy phrase "global warming" is a hot buzzword now but that's not the issue.The debate is whether it's man-made or a natural occurance,or the combination of both.I don't know how you can measure temp. change over the last 100+ years and conclude this is manmade.The earth is how many millions or billion years old?We have had numerous radical climate changes hot and cold way before man arrived on this planet.I love polar bears too but just because they are drowning does mean it is at the hands of a manmade climate change. __________________ SIKSUKR

03-30-2006, 04:48 PM	#17
MAXUM Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Kuna ID Posts: 2,755 Thanks: 246 Thanked 1,942 Times in 802 Posts	LOL what a bunch of garbage. Opening statement says it all... No one can say exactly what it looks like when a planet takes ill, but it probably looks a lot like Earth. Really.... because all the other planets in our solar system are looking like such better alternatives to earth to live on right? Great lets take all these tree huggers and ship them off to pluto! Enjoy your stay on a healthy planet! Notice how these "intellectual" people site global warming as a scientific "fact", even though the theory has been around for a while yet never has been proven. Let's talk fact, and the fact is that man has had NO proven effect on the temperature of the globe hence the reason why this is still a theory and probably always will be. Earth was a much warmer place before the ice age, who was to blame back then? How about global cooling...Oh yeah that evil killer asteroid that said EXXON on the side of it right? See back billions of years ago the "big oil" Neanderthals that are to blame! Crash the planet's climate into a cold state where everyone will need oil and gas to keep warm. Please, I'm all for conservation and newer clean burning technologies, and of course exploiting natural forms of energy, but where are these people when it comes to defending that wind farm off the MA south shore? Oh that's right, not in my back yard. They way you give up your SUV but keep your hands off mine.

03-30-2006, 06:49 PM	#19
trfour Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: The Lakes, Central NH. and Dallas/Fort Worth TX. Posts: 3,694 Blog Entries: 3 Thanks: 3,069 Thanked 472 Times in 236 Posts	The scientists can't seem to agree on global warming! Don't let's get any politicians involved in this topic. Politicians and diapers both need changing, and for the same reason. __________________ *trfour* Always Remember, The Best Safety Device In The Boat, or on a PWC Snowmobile etc., Is YOU! Safe sledding tips and much more; http://www.snowmobile.org/snowmobiling-safety.html

03-30-2006, 07:02 PM	#20
Airwaves Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: I'm right here! Posts: 1,153 Thanks: 9 Thanked 102 Times in 37 Posts	This is pretty much my last comment (maybe) on this topic because I don't have the knowledge needed to carry on an intelligent conversation on this subject. I am not a scientist. Not even close! However, a vast majority of scientists who study such things, and devote their lives to this subject, believe our current way of living (our meaning the human race not just Americans) is having a severe impact on our planet. I have seen photos of the ice melt on the polar caps. Again, these scientists say while those ice melts are cyclical, the fact that they are so dramatic in such a short period is alarming. Do I consider myself a tree hugger? No, I drive an SUV. However I am open minded enough to consider what the folks who know much more than I know, might be right. The U-S Govt says the issue needs more study. I ask you, who do you trust, a politician who needs more study (and needs to fundraise to be re-elected) or a scientist who has devoted his/her life and career to this topic (and needs grants to continue the research). Remember, once people thought the world was flat and the Earth was the center of the Universe.