Al Gore

[basswipe]

First of all why is this not in Scuppers?

Second,for all that man contributes to the downfall of the environment there are two things left out of Al's "documentary".

The Earth ALWAYS warms before an ice-age and yes kiddies we are due.How do we this know this you may ask?Well besides revolving around the sun the Earth also moves in and out of the Galactic Plane(above or below the Disc we call the Milkyway).This "in and out" movement directly affects the distance of the Earth in Aphelion or Peraphelion.This phenomenon is easily read from rocks.

The second thing is that Earth is due for what is called a "flip-flop".This is the changing of the magnetic poles.This occurs at or around the same time as the onset of an Iceage.We are so close to a "flip-flop" we all may actually see it within our lifetimes.

These occurrences are facts.Al kinda forgot that.

Looks like the "inventor" of the Internet is running out of money and needs to sell himself.He's as much a joke as Bush.

[baldwin]

Don't kid yourselves, there isn't a lot of argument in the scientific community, scientists are convinced that we are having a large impact here. Sure, natural climate change does happen, but it seems extremely likely that we're speeding the hell out of it. They know that CO2 insulates the atmosphere, keeps heat in. Think about all our cars, oil-burning homes, industries, slash-and-burn in the tropics, we're doubtlessly adding huge amounts to the atmosphere. Even if you believe there is some reason for doubt, I'd much rather err on the safe side,...and it'll do ourselves a lot of good in other ways, also. Renewable fuel sources would benefit us all tremendously, as well as help our ecosystems.
That comment about scientific theories is right on the money. Non-scientists confuse the word "theory" with the word "hypothesis". A hypothesis implies uncertainty, theory has to have a huge amount of supporting evidence. Scientists never say that anything is proven, by consensus, science leaves everything open to further testing. The opportunity for further testing is what gives science its credibility.
Adherents to the Intelligent Design hypothesis like to say that evolution is only a theory. It is fact, but called a theory because of the above reasons. That doesn't mean that there isn't a God, religion and science fit together very well if you don't develop a near-sighted case of tunnel vision.
If you don't have the training of the scientists who have the educational background and do that stuff for a living (biologists, geologists, chemists, environmental scientists, meteorologists...), then it would seem to me to be pretty naive to argue with them.
You wouldn't blindly go against the advice of your financial advisor about your retirement investments, or argue with your doctor about how to cure your possibly terminal case of cancer, would you? Leave the politics aside and use your sense of reason.

[nightprowler]

Originally Posted by baldwin

Don't kid yourselves, there isn't a lot of argument in the scientific community, scientists are convinced that we are having a large impact here. Sure, natural climate change does happen, but it seems extremely likely that we're speeding the hell out of it. They know that CO2 insulates the atmosphere, keeps heat in. Think about all our cars, oil-burning homes, industries, slash-and-burn in the tropics, we're doubtlessly adding huge amounts to the atmosphere. Even if you believe there is some reason for doubt, I'd much rather err on the safe side,...and it'll do ourselves a lot of good in other ways, also. Renewable fuel sources would benefit us all tremendously, as well as help our ecosystems.
That comment about scientific theories is right on the money. Non-scientists confuse the word "theory" with the word "hypothesis". A hypothesis implies uncertainty, theory has to have a huge amount of supporting evidence. Scientists never say that anything is proven, by consensus, science leaves everything open to further testing. The opportunity for further testing is what gives science its credibility.
Adherents to the Intelligent Design hypothesis like to say that evolution is only a theory. It is fact, but called a theory because of the above reasons. That doesn't mean that there isn't a God, religion and science fit together very well if you don't develop a near-sighted case of tunnel vision.
If you don't have the training of the scientists who have the educational background and do that stuff for a living (biologists, geologists, chemists, environmental scientists, meteorologists...), then it would seem to me to be pretty naive to argue with them.
You wouldn't blindly go against the advice of your financial advisor about your retirement investments, or argue with your doctor about how to cure your possibly terminal case of cancer, would you? Leave the politics aside and use your sense of reason.

[RIROCKHOUND]

Basswipe...
yeah but... not really...
Baldwin is right, among most scientists there is little disagreement that there is warming occurring. They tend to bicker about rates of change, mechanisms causing it, whats forcing what to change etc.. There is little debate that things ARE changing

Magnetic reversals happen at random intervals w/in the geologic record, 4-5times/million years with times of that being much longer. These are not directly linked to ice ages.

As far as they other cycles your describing are Milankovitch cycles, which determine the precession (wobble of the North Pole) Axial tilt (tilt of planet and causes seasons) and Eccentricity which determines how oval the earths orbit is. These occur on time scales of 23K, 41K, 100K (with a second peak at 400K). You are right about the Aphelion or Peraphelion, and in ~10.5K years our winters will occur at the time when we are furthest from the sun (the opposite of now) which COULD shift us into a glacial stage.

These can and do have a profound impact on climate change, however these have been going on for Millions of years (I have seen rocks where it was believed to have an influence on their deposition 400+Million years ago) But we have not always had ice-ages. They occur at intervals throughout the geologic record; ~700Million years ago, 300Million years ago etc.. the current one is less than 3mil years old with several glacial and interglacial periods.

Yes we are probably in an inter-glacial period, however some would argue that was the Early-Holocene was the warmest period, 10000ish years ago. The last Glacial maximum was the Laurentide Icesheet, which was ~24K years ago and extended south of Block island.

Baldwin basically hit the nail on the head, go with the weight of evidence approach. If 99 Doc's tells you smoking causes lung cancer, you can choose to believe the 1 that tells you it doesn't. There will always be naysayers and disbelievers, and if they choose to use politics as their platform shame on them. What this did do was get people talking about global warming who might not have talked about it before. And hopefully it helped people realize that 'The day after tomorrow' was not going to be reality... changes wont happen that fast. I think the fastest change in the ice-cores are 4 or 5 Degrees C in a few decades.

[basswipe]

RIRock while I essentially agree with a good portion of what you stated, but not all.

In the end Man only accelerates our inevitable return to an Iceage by a mere few hundred years,a blink of an eye in time.The time IS now.This is where Baldwin and I will disagree.Most scientists are not saying that Man is the major contributing factor to our planet getting warmer but that we are entering another massive global climatic change that heralds the next Iceage.Whether "non-scientists" know the difference between theory and hypothesis doesn't matter,the fact is time marches on and moves forward.The fact is Time says we are on the doorstep of our next Iceage and that the Earth gets very warm right before that happens.The rocks don't lie.


As far as magnetic reversal is concerned,"Flip-flops" absolutely occur around the same time as massive global climatic changes +/- a few million years and not at random but at a very regular interval almost timely according to most geologists.But when you take into consideration the age of the Earth(4 billion years) that +/- a few million ain't so big,it does coincide with massive climatic changes.
Again the rocks don't lie.

[RIROCKHOUND]

Umm..
as a geologist I am quite familiar with the fact that the rocks don't lie.

As far as the reversals; currently they happen 4-5 times every million years, yes we are due. But that doesn't mean we'll have one and it certainly does not mean it causes an ice-age! In climate change +/- a million years is everything. I could tell you that an Asteroid hit the Yucatan and +/- a few million years later the dinosaurs went extinct.

Do me a favor. quote your sources and let me get on your page and we'll talk.

[SocalStriper]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

Umm..
as a geologist I am quite familiar with the fact that the rocks don't lie.

as a public servant, I am quite familiar with the fact that the rocks don't speak english.

hehe j/k

[spence]

Originally Posted by basswipe

Whether "non-scientists" know the difference between theory and hypothesis doesn't matter,the fact is time marches on and moves forward.

The problem is a lot of those "non-scientists" are really energy industry marketing firms

Like I said, I believe there's debate as to the total influence of man...but few believe that man isn't having a large influence.

Listen to Rush Limbaugh on this topic and it's no wonder people don't see the substance of the issue. The baseless claims and disinformation he spews forth is pretty amazing.

-spence