Actually Craig, if you check my Facebook stream, you'll see a whole slew of articles in 2008 that basically destroyed the theory of AGW entirely. Huge advancements were achieved in our understanding of solar and terran climate cycles, and it was well established that human carbon production has minimal impact on weather cycles, period. The new articles you are seeing simply ignore the new data in favor of a well established grant pool. Ask Neil...it's publish or die, and they're certainly not going to give up a six figure endowment. ;)
On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 7:44 PM, Kierkecraig <[email protected]>wrote: > > Has anyone on here ever seen a news article, or scientific article, or > anything else where it said "global warming may not be as bad as > originally predicted"? It seems that every couple weeks or at least > once a month, I see an article that tells me that global warming is > worse than they originally predicted. If everyone of those articles > was true, the cumulative effect would have us literally on fire at > this point. Either that, or they were really really modest in their > original estimates. > > On Jan 18, 2:33 pm, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > The Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Forest Service, Department > > of Energy, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and > > National Science Foundation contributed to a recent report indicating > > that small climate change moves may well have devastating impacts. > > To view the full report, Synthesis and Assessment Product 4.2: > > Thresholds of Climate Change in Ecosystems, visithttp:// > climatescience.gov. > > > > The main finding of this report is that once a threshold is passed the > > system may go beyond recovery. It seems possible to argue against > > global warming, but it really is not. Yet I still feel the real case > > has not be made properly, in a really understandable manner. > > > > On 18 Jan, 21:15, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > We have given up our coal powered Aga in the kitchen Orn. Used to > > > see that as rather "green", but we could leave three patio heaters > > > pointed at the sun on 365/24/7 and cause less carbon loading! We > > > still have a PM talking up a doubling in the global economy as a good > > > thing. It is almost impossible to be enthusiastic as a UKdian these > > > days. Time for a whole new economy - maybe "god" dropped a big hint > > > in collapsing the banks? I really do think something like this kind > > > of catastrophe is coming - in any case more local, greener economies > > > would do us all good, except a few super rich. > > > On 18 Jan, 19:31, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > guardian.co.uk > > > > > > President 'has four years to save Earth' > > > > > > US must take the lead to avert eco-disaster > > > > Robin McKie in New York The Observer, Sunday 18 January 2009 > > > > > > Barack Obama has only four years to save the world. That is the stark > > > > assessment of Nasa scientist and leading climate expert Jim Hansen > > > > who > > > > last week warned only urgent action by the new president could halt > > > > the devastating climate change that now threatens Earth. Crucially, > > > > that action will have to be taken within Obama's first > > > > administration, > > > > he added. > > > > > > Soaring carbon emissions are already causing ice-cap melting and > > > > threaten to trigger global flooding, widespread species loss and > > > > major > > > > disruptions of weather patterns in the near future. "We cannot afford > > > > to put off change any longer," said Hansen. "We have to get on a new > > > > path within this new administration. We have only four years left for > > > > Obama to set an example to the rest of the world. America must take > > > > the lead." > > > > > > Hansen said current carbon levels in the atmosphere were already too > > > > high to prevent runaway greenhouse warming. Yet the levels are still > > > > rising despite all the efforts of politicians and scientists. > > > > > > Only the US now had the political muscle to lead the world and halt > > > > the rise, Hansen said. Having refused to recognise that global > > > > warming > > > > posed any risk at all over the past eight years, the US now had to > > > > take a lead as the world's greatest carbon emitter and the planet's > > > > largest economy. Cap-and-trade schemes, in which emission permits are > > > > bought and sold, have failed, he said, and must now be replaced by a > > > > carbon tax that will imposed on all producers of fossil fuels. At the > > > > same time, there must be a moratorium on new power plants that burn > > > > coal - the world's worst carbon emitter. > > > > > > Hansen - head of the Goddard Institute of Space Studies and winner of > > > > the WWF's top conservation award - first warned Earth was in danger > > > > from climate change in 1988 and has been the victim of several > > > > unsuccessful attempts by the White House administration of George > > > > Bush > > > > to silence his views. > > > > > > Hansen's institute monitors temperature fluctuations at thousands of > > > > sites round the world, data that has led him to conclude that most > > > > estimates of sea level rises triggered by rising atmospheric > > > > temperatures are too low and too conservative. For example, the > > > > Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change says a rise of between 20cm > > > > and 60cm can be expected by the end of the century. > > > > > > However, Hansen said feedbacks in the climate system are already > > > > accelerating ice melt and are threatening to lead to the collapse of > > > > ice sheets. Sea-level rises will therefore be far greater - a claim > > > > backed last week by a group of British, Danish and Finnish scientists > > > > who said studies of past variations in climate indicate that a far > > > > more likely figure for sea-level rise will be about 1.4 metres, > > > > enough > > > > to cause devastating flooding of many of the world's major cities and > > > > of low-lying areas of Holland, Bangladesh and other nations. > > > > > > As a result of his fears about sea-level rise, Hansen said he had > > > > pressed both Britain's Royal Society and the US National Academy of > > > > Sciences to carry out an urgent investigation of the state of the > > > > planet's ice-caps. However, nothing had come of his proposals. The > > > > first task of Obama's new climate office should therefore be to order > > > > such a probe "as a matter of urgency", Hansen added. > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
