http://www.slate.com/blogs/trending/...cene_era_.html


Antarctica has yielded implications about global warming that are chilling.

Drilling deep into the seabed just off Earth's southernmost continent, researchers have discovered remnants of a near-tropical rainforest that existed 50 million years ago.

During this period, known as the early Eocene era, the Earth experienced dramatic greenhouse conditions with high atmospheric carbon dioxide counts and palm trees growing around the South Pole

How could this have happened before without the aid of man?

Climate is cyclical?

Current scientists and professors, for the most part are far too egotistical to think anyone other than 'man' can cause weather phenomena.

This is why the current belief in America, professors know the economy far superior to anyone participating in it.

Kind of like the clumsy father who yells at his kid for missing a pitch or an obese mother scolding her beauty pagent daughter about her dance.

It will be any day now when they dig deeper that they will find the SUV's of the lost society that produced so much greenhouse gasses that they perished.

maybe cavemen weren't just hunter/gatherers? perhaps when man invented the wheel back then, he had also invented an early version of the internal combustion engine, and we just hadn't discovered the fossils yet. what else can explain it?
that and apparently the much older version of the cow must have produced a lot more methane than our modern holsteins, etc. :D

cyclical?!?! you're obviously not paying attention. we can control weather, damnit. we just have to try harder.

Nah, it will turn out to be the disposal of the hybrid batteries they used to try and save the world the first time that did them in.

No wait, that will be us.

The absolute best thing about this thread is the use of the word "unprecedented", then the mention of this thing happening about every 150 years or so.

Koch Brothers-Funded Climate Change Skeptic: 'Global Warming is Real and Man is Causing It'

Prominent climate change denier now admits he was wrong
Richard Muller, who directed a Koch-funded climate change project, has undergone a 'total turnaround' on his stance on global warming, which he now admits is caused by human activity

http://www.csmonitor.com/Science/201...as-wrong-video

This, according to Richard A. Muller, professor of physics at UC Berkeley, MacArthur Fellow and co-founder of the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project. Never mind that the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and hundreds of other climatologists around the world came to such conclusions years ago.

The difference now is the source: Muller is a long-standing, colorful critic of prevailing climate science, and the Berkeley project was heavily funded by the Charles Koch Charitable Foundation, which, along with its libertarian petrochemical billionaire founder Charles G. Koch, has a considerable history of backing groups that deny climate change.

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics...,7372823.story

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/201...bon-pollution/

:tro:

saw today that the number of tornadoes this year is down significantly from the usual number of twisters. that's good news.

As are the hurricanes and that forecast. Long term predictions for this winter are already positive for snow/temperatures.
Maybe the sky isn't exactly falling?

Short-term weather and long-term climate pattern change are two different things.

The main science man for the climate change deniers, the one guy that fed all the "science sucks and is wrong" "there are other points of view" Faux outrage conflating science with politics over the past many years (easier to hate that liberal jackass Al Gore than understand the subject he was talking about) has now recanted his former scientific position, and said he was wrong about his former interpretation of climate change data.

Now he says climate change is real, it's here, and it's man-made.

Based on .0001% of the timeline is not long term data collection. It is "in recorded history". And exactly how accurate were the measuring devices for weather/climate in 1884?

Again, weather and climate are two different things. Our world climate info goes back thousands of years: glacial cores, rock samples, etc

thousands is still near 0.

pointman linked to a different article on forbes...read it, and then saw the link to this one, from last winter:


http://www.forbes.com/sites/louiswoo...lobal-warming/


an excerpt:

The meeting in Durban provided an opportunity for Progressives to make their latest argument that ordinary people should surrender their freedom and hand all money and power over to unelected, unaccountable “experts” like, well, the people at the conference. This is, of course, in order to “save the planet” from “climate change”. (The issue that had for years been called “global warming” was rebranded as “climate change” when the most recent decade’s worth of data proved uncooperative.)

and the last three paragraphs:

Given that geoengineering has the potential to actually do something about the climate change “problem”, the reaction of the climate change crowd to it has been illuminating. They have gone all-out to stop geoengineering experiments from being conducted, and they are doing everything they can to prevent geoengineering from even being discussed.

Climate change proponents recently mounted a desperate effort to stop an experiment in Britain designed to spray 40 gallons of pure water into the upper atmosphere (the so-called SPICE project). Thus far, they have managed to delay the test, and they are arguing that even if the experiment goes ahead, the results should not be made public.

The Progressives are well aware that their opposition to geoengineering experiments exposes their entire game, which is all about money, power, and central-planning control of people’s lives, and has nothing to do with concern about the earth. Unfortunately (for them), they have no choice. Geoengineering solutions might actually work, but they do not require that Progressives be given taxpayer money to hold lavish conferences in lovely places like Durban, South Africa.

40 gallons of water!!?? These people are crazy that could kill us all!

:D

http://www.slate.com/articles/health..._weather_.html

How "Policy By Panic" Can Backfire for EnvironmentalistsSaying that droughts are caused by global warming leads to public distrust and disengagement when the rain starts to fall.
By Bjørn Lomborg|Posted Friday, Aug. 17, 2012, at 7:15 AM ET

some interesting snippets:


A hot, dry summer (in some places) has triggered another barrage of such claims. And, while many interests are at work, one of the players that benefits the most from this story are the media: the notion of “extreme” climate simply makes for more compelling news.

He claims that global warming caused the current drought in America’s Midwest, and that supposedly record-high corn prices could cause a global food crisis.

But the United Nations climate panel’s latest assessment tells us precisely the opposite: For “North America, there is medium confidence that there has been an overall slight tendency toward less dryness (wetting trend with more soil moisture and runoff).”

And, fortunately, this year’s drought appears unlikely to cause a food crisis.

Nowadays 40 percent of corn grown in the United States is used to produce ethanol, which does absolutely nothing for the climate, but certainly distorts the price of corn—at the expense of many of the world’s poorest people.

Bill McKibben similarly frets in The Guardian and The Daily Beast about the Midwest drought and corn prices. Moreover, he confidently tells us that raging wildfires from New Mexico and Colorado to Siberia are “exactly” what the early stages of global warming look like.

In fact, the latest overview of global wildfire incidence suggests that, because humans have suppressed fire and decreased vegetation density, fire intensity has declined over the past 70 years and is now close to its preindustrial level.


Remember how, in the wake of Hurricane Katrina in 2005, Al Gore (and many others) claimed that we were in store for ever more devastating hurricanes? Since then, hurricane incidence has dropped off the charts; indeed, by one measure, global accumulated cyclone energy has decreased to its lowest levels since the late 1970’s.

Warming will increase some extremes (it is likely that both droughts and fires will become worse toward the end of the century). But warming will also decrease other extremes, for example, leading to fewer deaths from cold and less water scarcity.