Do we have a climatologist here? That would help the debate. However, I have to say that I have my doubts when it comes to predictions by these experts. You see, we do not have any credible scientific model for weather prediction that works for periods longer than a week, how can we expect to make accurate previsions regarding climate in the distant future?
Brazil is far from leading the state-of-the-art research in climatology, but a few scientist here have made good points against the hysteria of anthropic global warming. The best point, in my opinion, is that we just lack information on how the sun behaved during the past climate changes. It seems to me that the sun is quite important when we are talking about temperature. Many good scientists are not very fond of the theory that more CO2 means higher temperatures, but rather the opposite, that increases in temperature provoked spikes of the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere. I am always worried when I hear about scientific consensus, but specially in a field where proof is something still distant and "computer-model" based. What worries me is that poor countries need to increase their emissions in order to get richer. And we know for a fact that poverty not only plagues mankind, but also have a very real and powerful negative effect on the environment. Forests are being cut down and many rivers are polluted worldwide because poor people can't avoid using these resources but in a unsustainable way. CO2 might disrupts climate, but poverty certainly destroys the environment. Just my opinion, but it seems rather illogical to take actions on something that* might* be true to make something that is *certainly* bad happen. Make no mistakes, CO2 emissions controls will put a halt in economic development. There is no development without cheap and abundant energy. And today cheap and abundant energy comes from carbon. 2012/7/30 Jed Rothwell <[email protected]> > Jojo Jaro <[email protected]> wrote: > > None of these effects you mentioned below have been tied to any thing >> remotely associated with Warming. >> > > That is incorrect. Everything on the list has been associated with global > warming by experts. That does not mean the experts were correct or that > these effects really will be caused by global warming. I have some doubts > about ocean circulation, for example. > > > >> Like you said, You got it from the Web. And we all know that the Web >> contains all sort of correct information. There is absolutely nothing >> false or incorrect from information you get on the web, right? >> > > I usually get my information from books written by experts, rather than > from the web. I never accept information from anonymous sources such as > Wikipedia unless I can confirm it with something written by a bona fide > expert who signs his or her real name. I can vouch for the claims listed > here. They have been associated with global warming by various experts. As > I said, I doubt that some will follow, but others clearly will, and it > takes no special expertise to see that. Many are happening already. > > - Jed > >
