While the precise contribution to global warming of greenhouse gases and = other factors like fluctuations in solar output are apparently yet = unknown, I think it bears keeping in mind that, from first principles, = greenhouse warming is expected from the large recent rise in CO2 = concentrations. Let's remember that greenhouse warming from CO2 is = supposedly one of the main factors that has made this planet warm enough = to sustain life. If that's the case for the distant past, why would we = not expect the huge recent rises in CO2 to also cause greenhouse = warming? And--even if some large percent of recent climate warming is = due to other factors such as increased solar output, we expect = greenhouse warming to magnify such effects---while solar output is not = under our control, anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gasses are. = Thus, one major way to mitigate warming due to other sources is to = reduce our production of greenhouse gasses.
1.5 cents worth from a non-climate scientist, Dave W. ************ One of my useful mottos is "The roughest guess THAT GETS THE JOB=20 DONE." That's a heavy condition, but sometime rough guesses can be=20 helpful. They can "do" until the data "savior" or "perfection" comes = along. I don't do original research on the anthropogenic influences on=20 climate either, but I remain skeptical about "credible" sources. I=20 need to know more about most "credible" sources. But the=20 precautionary principle leads me to the conclusion that, regardless=20 of the background fluctuations of climate, it makes sense for a lot=20 of reasons to cut back on carbon and other emissions, particularly=20 the low-priority and wasteful ones, e.g., the lighting of advertising=20 signs . . . WT At 06:35 PM 10/12/2007, Larry T. Spencer wrote: >As someone who has followed this area very closely (though not doing >research per se), it is interesting that the site that lists the >prominent scientists is none other than the blog of Sen. Imhofe of >Oklahoma who when he was chair of the committee had requested tons of >materials from the people who had put together the long term record of >temperature change. He is the same Senator, who made some outrageous >statements about the science and its practitioners. > >We do know that climate has been quite variable in the past, with some >pretty large swings, Luckily, we weren't present when those swings took >place. Unfortunately, we are here today and in ever growing numbers >and living in locations that will be quickly affected by even minimal >changes in sea level. We all saw what impact the loss of the wetland >buffers had on New Orleans with respect to Katrina. A little bit of >sea level rise with strong on-shore winds will wreck havoc in many >parts of the world. Recent reports by the National Snow/Ice Center in >Boulder indicates that more sea ice has melted in the past decade than >in previous decades. Although the melting of sea ice does not increase >sea level, the melting of the glaciers on Greenland certainly will. I >hope Paul's house is not at sea level :) > >Larry > >-- >Larry T. Spencer, Professor Emeritus of Biology >Plymouth State University > >---------------------------------------------------------------- >This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging
