Scientists respond to Gore's warnings of climate catastrophe
-
Link "Professor Bob Carter of the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University, in Australia gives what, for many Canadians, is a surprising assessment: "Gore's circumstantial arguments are so weak that they are pathetic. It is simply incredible that they, and his film, are commanding public attention."" "But surely Carter is merely part of what most people regard as a tiny cadre of "climate change skeptics" who disagree with the "vast majority of scientists" Gore cites? No; Carter is one of hundreds of highly qualified non-governmental, non-industry, non-lobby group climate experts who contest the hypothesis that human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) are causing significant global climate change. "Climate experts" is the operative term here. Why? Because what Gore's "majority of scientists" think is immaterial when only a very small fraction of them actually work in the climate field. " My mom told me once that "while we all don't speak the same language, everyone in the world undestands an asskicking"
We need to figure out how to stop volcanic activity. Preventing a couple volcanoes from going off will do more for the environment than all combined attempts at reducing fossil fuel consumption. ---------- Some problems are so complex that you have to be highly intelligent and well informed just to be undecided about them. - Laurence J. Peters
-
Unfortunately, I trust Mr. "Professor Bob Carter of the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University, in Australia" as (un-)much as Mr. Al Gore. of course, such things are easier if you are republican ;P
kgaddy wrote:
Carter is one of hundreds of highly qualified non-governmental, non-industry, non-lobby group climate experts
Yeah right, I'll ask Grunthos the Flatulent next time I meet him for the complete list and check if Mr. Carter is on it.
Some of us walk the memory lane, others plummet into a rabbit hole
Tree in C# || Fold With Us! || sighistWould you trust the foremost meteorologist in the world? The one who invented long term hurricane prediction models?
-
We need to figure out how to stop volcanic activity. Preventing a couple volcanoes from going off will do more for the environment than all combined attempts at reducing fossil fuel consumption. ---------- Some problems are so complex that you have to be highly intelligent and well informed just to be undecided about them. - Laurence J. Peters
Not according to the USGS. Scientists have calculated that volcanoes emit between about 130-230 million tonnes (145-255 million tons) of CO2 into the atmosphere every year (Gerlach, 1999, 1992). This estimate includes both subaerial and submarine volcanoes, about in equal amounts. Emissions of CO2 by human activities, including fossil fuel burning, cement production, and gas flaring, amount to about 22 billion tonnes per year (24 billion tons) http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/Hazards/What/VolGas/volgas.html[^]
I can imagine the sinking feeling one would have after ordering my book, only to find a laughably ridiculous theory with demented logic once the book arrives - Mark McCutcheon
-
Link "Professor Bob Carter of the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University, in Australia gives what, for many Canadians, is a surprising assessment: "Gore's circumstantial arguments are so weak that they are pathetic. It is simply incredible that they, and his film, are commanding public attention."" "But surely Carter is merely part of what most people regard as a tiny cadre of "climate change skeptics" who disagree with the "vast majority of scientists" Gore cites? No; Carter is one of hundreds of highly qualified non-governmental, non-industry, non-lobby group climate experts who contest the hypothesis that human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) are causing significant global climate change. "Climate experts" is the operative term here. Why? Because what Gore's "majority of scientists" think is immaterial when only a very small fraction of them actually work in the climate field. " My mom told me once that "while we all don't speak the same language, everyone in the world undestands an asskicking"
My opinion of the global warming "issue". The old orb has been around for a helluva long time. Science shows you that it has gone through change after change. The current "issue" presumes the orb's current state is the correct state and the human population should do everything in their power to keep it thus so that people living inland continnue living inland, people living on the seashore continue above water, warm areas stay warm and cold stay cold. Pure fucking human arrogance. Mike "We ain't stuck on stupid." badass Lt. General Russel Honore **"Remember - live bunnies are a great source of nourishment"**silly-assed cartoon A vegan is someone who never heard a carrot cry!
-
Not according to the USGS. Scientists have calculated that volcanoes emit between about 130-230 million tonnes (145-255 million tons) of CO2 into the atmosphere every year (Gerlach, 1999, 1992). This estimate includes both subaerial and submarine volcanoes, about in equal amounts. Emissions of CO2 by human activities, including fossil fuel burning, cement production, and gas flaring, amount to about 22 billion tonnes per year (24 billion tons) http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/Hazards/What/VolGas/volgas.html[^]
I can imagine the sinking feeling one would have after ordering my book, only to find a laughably ridiculous theory with demented logic once the book arrives - Mark McCutcheon
-
Would you trust the foremost meteorologist in the world? The one who invented long term hurricane prediction models?
I would trust every scientist worth his title to find flaws in a movie targeted at the mass market, especially at the americanized mass market. And I would trust every scientist who starts with "I really can't tell for sure. We have some models, and the one I consider most solid an (n +-x) probability for total annihilation:" of course, these things are simpler if you are republican. ;P
Some of us walk the memory lane, others plummet into a rabbit hole
Tree in C# || Fold With Us! || sighist -
I would trust every scientist worth his title to find flaws in a movie targeted at the mass market, especially at the americanized mass market. And I would trust every scientist who starts with "I really can't tell for sure. We have some models, and the one I consider most solid an (n +-x) probability for total annihilation:" of course, these things are simpler if you are republican. ;P
Some of us walk the memory lane, others plummet into a rabbit hole
Tree in C# || Fold With Us! || sighistYou seem more concerned with Republicans than anything else. Maybe you should move on, we are talking about global warming, and if it's humans or nature having the biggest imact. My mom told me once that "while we all don't speak the same language, everyone in the world undestands an asskicking"
-
Give Gore a break. He's just searching for a platform for his 2008 bid for president.
-
I think you guys are in agreement My mom told me once that "while we all don't speak the same language, everyone in the world undestands an asskicking"
I'm in agreement with whom? We emit at least 100 times more CO2 then volcanos.
I can imagine the sinking feeling one would have after ordering my book, only to find a laughably ridiculous theory with demented logic once the book arrives - Mark McCutcheon
-
Not according to the USGS. Scientists have calculated that volcanoes emit between about 130-230 million tonnes (145-255 million tons) of CO2 into the atmosphere every year (Gerlach, 1999, 1992). This estimate includes both subaerial and submarine volcanoes, about in equal amounts. Emissions of CO2 by human activities, including fossil fuel burning, cement production, and gas flaring, amount to about 22 billion tonnes per year (24 billion tons) http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/Hazards/What/VolGas/volgas.html[^]
I can imagine the sinking feeling one would have after ordering my book, only to find a laughably ridiculous theory with demented logic once the book arrives - Mark McCutcheon
Not just CO2. sulfur dioxide (S02) hydrogen sulfide (H2S) hydrogen (H2) carbon monoxide (CO) hydrogen chloride (HCL) hydrogen fluoride (HF) helium (He) Why do you feel the need to defend volcanoes? ---------- Some problems are so complex that you have to be highly intelligent and well informed just to be undecided about them. - Laurence J. Peters
-
You seem more concerned with Republicans than anything else. Maybe you should move on, we are talking about global warming, and if it's humans or nature having the biggest imact. My mom told me once that "while we all don't speak the same language, everyone in the world undestands an asskicking"
On the contrary, dear Watson. The question is not if we have the biggest impact, but if we can and should change something.
Some of us walk the memory lane, others plummet into a rabbit hole
Tree in C# || Fold With Us! || sighist -
My opinion of the global warming "issue". The old orb has been around for a helluva long time. Science shows you that it has gone through change after change. The current "issue" presumes the orb's current state is the correct state and the human population should do everything in their power to keep it thus so that people living inland continnue living inland, people living on the seashore continue above water, warm areas stay warm and cold stay cold. Pure fucking human arrogance. Mike "We ain't stuck on stupid." badass Lt. General Russel Honore **"Remember - live bunnies are a great source of nourishment"**silly-assed cartoon A vegan is someone who never heard a carrot cry!
Mike Gaskey wrote:
The old orb has been around for a helluva long time.
Without us.
Mike Gaskey wrote:
shows you that it has gone through change after change.
And not everybody survived this.
Mike Gaskey wrote:
The current "issue" presumes the orb's current state is the correct state
The "correct state" is one that changes slow enough for humans to adopt to. And I don't mean just fossil powered biosphered humans, but humans as such. It may be arrogant to think we can change things for the better, but it needs a total loser to give up before trying.
Some of us walk the memory lane, others plummet into a rabbit hole
Tree in C# || Fold With Us! || sighist -
On the contrary, dear Watson. The question is not if we have the biggest impact, but if we can and should change something.
Some of us walk the memory lane, others plummet into a rabbit hole
Tree in C# || Fold With Us! || sighistBut, as the scientist say, our imapact is less than 1%. What could we do to stop nature? And should we? My mom told me once that "while we all don't speak the same language, everyone in the world undestands an asskicking" -- modified at 14:13 Wednesday 14th June, 2006
-
I'm in agreement with whom? We emit at least 100 times more CO2 then volcanos.
I can imagine the sinking feeling one would have after ordering my book, only to find a laughably ridiculous theory with demented logic once the book arrives - Mark McCutcheon
-
Mike Gaskey wrote:
The old orb has been around for a helluva long time.
Without us.
Mike Gaskey wrote:
shows you that it has gone through change after change.
And not everybody survived this.
Mike Gaskey wrote:
The current "issue" presumes the orb's current state is the correct state
The "correct state" is one that changes slow enough for humans to adopt to. And I don't mean just fossil powered biosphered humans, but humans as such. It may be arrogant to think we can change things for the better, but it needs a total loser to give up before trying.
Some of us walk the memory lane, others plummet into a rabbit hole
Tree in C# || Fold With Us! || sighistpeterchen wrote:
It may be arrogant to think we can change things for the better, but it needs a total loser to give up before trying.
let's find a cure for the common cold, then work up to more Godly endeavors. Mike "We ain't stuck on stupid." badass Lt. General Russel Honore **"Remember - live bunnies are a great source of nourishment"**silly-assed cartoon A vegan is someone who never heard a carrot cry!
-
Not just CO2. sulfur dioxide (S02) hydrogen sulfide (H2S) hydrogen (H2) carbon monoxide (CO) hydrogen chloride (HCL) hydrogen fluoride (HF) helium (He) Why do you feel the need to defend volcanoes? ---------- Some problems are so complex that you have to be highly intelligent and well informed just to be undecided about them. - Laurence J. Peters
EricDV wrote:
Why do you feel the need to defend volcanoes?
I guess I'm just born to love volcanoes. WTF?
I can imagine the sinking feeling one would have after ordering my book, only to find a laughably ridiculous theory with demented logic once the book arrives - Mark McCutcheon
-
Link "Professor Bob Carter of the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University, in Australia gives what, for many Canadians, is a surprising assessment: "Gore's circumstantial arguments are so weak that they are pathetic. It is simply incredible that they, and his film, are commanding public attention."" "But surely Carter is merely part of what most people regard as a tiny cadre of "climate change skeptics" who disagree with the "vast majority of scientists" Gore cites? No; Carter is one of hundreds of highly qualified non-governmental, non-industry, non-lobby group climate experts who contest the hypothesis that human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) are causing significant global climate change. "Climate experts" is the operative term here. Why? Because what Gore's "majority of scientists" think is immaterial when only a very small fraction of them actually work in the climate field. " My mom told me once that "while we all don't speak the same language, everyone in the world undestands an asskicking"
As near as I can find, the High Park Group, which the author of the article works for, is basically a shill for the Canadian Electric Industry. So maybe he isn't quite unbiased either. The evolution of the human genome is too important to be left to chance.
-
But, as the scientist say, our imapact is less than 1%. What could we do to stop nature? And should we? My mom told me once that "while we all don't speak the same language, everyone in the world undestands an asskicking" -- modified at 14:13 Wednesday 14th June, 2006
Other scientists say 99%, so could haggle. And even 0.1% may save our collective asses: I have no expertise whatsoever, except some general ad-hoc knowledge, but: An ecosystem is highly nonlinear. The models I 'know' (relatively speaking) have huge "stability" regions (converging or divergent), smaller regions of strong nonlinearity (small change in input, big change depending on the current state), and tiny regions of chaos. if we run into the divergent we are fucked, and in the chaotic region we are merely visitors. The point is: we don't know. Increase of average temperature is not the problem, merely a symptom of change. Trying to preserve the status quo is a temprting "short term" solution until we know more, though. After all, we know that we can survive in the current climate :cool:
Some of us walk the memory lane, others plummet into a rabbit hole
Tree in C# || Fold With Us! || sighist -
peterchen wrote:
It may be arrogant to think we can change things for the better, but it needs a total loser to give up before trying.
let's find a cure for the common cold, then work up to more Godly endeavors. Mike "We ain't stuck on stupid." badass Lt. General Russel Honore **"Remember - live bunnies are a great source of nourishment"**silly-assed cartoon A vegan is someone who never heard a carrot cry!
I can live with the common cold, but I cannot live in an +/- 100°C atmosphere.
Some of us walk the memory lane, others plummet into a rabbit hole
Tree in C# || Fold With Us! || sighist -
Other scientists say 99%, so could haggle. And even 0.1% may save our collective asses: I have no expertise whatsoever, except some general ad-hoc knowledge, but: An ecosystem is highly nonlinear. The models I 'know' (relatively speaking) have huge "stability" regions (converging or divergent), smaller regions of strong nonlinearity (small change in input, big change depending on the current state), and tiny regions of chaos. if we run into the divergent we are fucked, and in the chaotic region we are merely visitors. The point is: we don't know. Increase of average temperature is not the problem, merely a symptom of change. Trying to preserve the status quo is a temprting "short term" solution until we know more, though. After all, we know that we can survive in the current climate :cool:
Some of us walk the memory lane, others plummet into a rabbit hole
Tree in C# || Fold With Us! || sighistpeterchen wrote:
The point is: we don't know.
Yes, we agree, and quite simply the point. So before we start making all these changes, shouldn't we find out? My mom told me once that "while we all don't speak the same language, everyone in the world undestands an asskicking"
