Don't tell trees that Global Climate Change is a Myth!

[Thiebear]

China's carbon emissions grew 9.9 percent in 2011 after rising 10.4 percent in 2010 and now comprise 28 percent of all CO2 pollution compared with 16 percent for the United States.

India's emissions grew 7.5 percent last year versus 9.4 percent growth in 2010,

while emissions in the United States and the European Union fell 1.8 percent and 2.8 respectively in 2011.

Though i bet if you took the outsourcing back Europe and US would be even at best?

The world pays off the countries willing to do it for them.

[PeterMP]

Though i bet if you took the outsourcing back Europe and US would be even at best?

The world pays off the countries willing to do it for them.

Gas mielage in the US has gone up. It is even higher in most of Europe so it could have more.

But that's a real reduction in CO2 output.

Over the last 20-25 years, Europe has continually changed small things like packaging waste (as cited in the previous post).

That leads to a real reduction of CO2 output.

Certainly, some of it has been out sourced, but some real things are being done that we can point to an say that helps minimize CO2 output.

More so in European countries than the US.

[Thiebear]

What's the myth part?

The article said all trees are a sip away from

Dying wet or dry due to c02?

[Burgold]

The article was one study out of the four we discussed for the radio report.

[JMS]

Of coarse global climate change is a myth... All you have to do to see how stupid global warming is, is to review the 10 hottest years on recorded since 1880 as provided by NOAA.

The 10 hottest years of the last 132 years recorded by NOAA all occurred in the last 14 years.

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010/20101015_globalstats_sup.html

[Thiebear]

I'm pretty sure everyone understands we are in

The 8th warming period within the last million years.

All of them happening on a regular schedule.

Are we referring to this one being pointier than the others due to mankind?

(this being the myth: man made this one worse

With the extent under review)

Or that we don't want global warming anymore

So we should stop it by cleaning up and asking others to do the same.

[JMS]

I'm pretty sure everyone understands we are in

The 8th warming period within the last million years.

Are we referring to this one being pointier than the others due to mankind?

"Everyone knows" that global warming is a cyclical event playing out over 1 million years? Resulting in the 10 hottest years on record occurring in the last 14 years?

Is that what the anti global warming movement has devolved into....

I don't know anybody who has ever claimed that, other than you and likely some obscure right wing and or petroleum industry sponsored research you are about to site.

[Thiebear]

Normally warming periods get hotter as they go along yes.

JMS: when did it start?

[RedskinsFan44]

I'm pretty sure everyone understands we are in

The 8th warming period within the last million years.

All of them happening on a regular schedule.

Are we referring to this one being pointier than the others due to mankind?

(this being the myth: man made this one worse

With the extent under review)

Or that we don't want global warming anymore

So we should stop it by cleaning up and asking others to do the same.

Do you honestly believe that humans can not influence the climate with their actions? The atmosphere and the earth are not infinite. It would seem like you could dump a little mercury in the ocean with no ill effect but eventually you start seeing it in the tuna you harvest.

[alexey]

Normally warming periods get hotter as they go along yes.

JMS: when did it start?

http://climatesight.org/2011/01/11/its-just-a-natural-cycle/

A common misunderstanding of the climate system characterizes it like a pendulum. The planet will warm up to “cancel out” a previous period of cooling, spurred by some internal equilibrium. This view of the climate is incorrect. Internal variability will move energy between the ocean and the atmosphere, causing short-term warming and cooling of the surface in events such as El Nino and La Nina, and longer-term changes when similar cycles operate on decadal scales. However, internal forces do not cause climate change. Appreciable changes in climate are the result of changes in the energy balance of the Earth, which requires “external” forcings, such as changes in solar output, albedo, and atmospheric greenhouse gases. These forcings can be cyclical, as they are in the ice ages, but they can come in different shapes entirely.

For this reason, “it’s just a natural cycle” is a bit of a cop-out argument. The Earth doesn’t warm up because it feels like it. It warms up because something forces it to. Scientists keep track of natural forcings, but the observed warming of the planet over the second half of the 20th century can only be explained by adding in anthropogenic radiative forcings, namely increases in greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide.

Of course, it’s always possible that some natural cycle exists, unknown to scientists and their instruments, that is currently causing the planet to warm. There’s always a chance that we could be totally wrong. This omnipresent fact of science is called irreducible uncertainty, because it can never be entirely eliminated. However, it’s very unlikely that such a cycle exists.

...

A natural cycle that fits all these fingerprints is nearly unfathomable. However, that’s not all the cycle would have to explain. It would also have to tell us why anthropogenic greenhouse gases are*not having an effect. Either a century of basic physics and chemistry studying the radiative properties of greenhouse gases would have to be proven wrong, or the natural cycle would have to be unbelievably complex to prevent such dramatic anthropogenic emissions from warming the planet.

It is a interesting way to flip the argument... if you say that this is a part of a natural cycle, then you would have to explain why we are not seeing anthropogenic climate change.

[Thiebear]

http://www.longrangeweather.com/global_temperatures.htm

[Thiebear]

Shouldn't take us 5months to figure out how to

Fire off a few mode volcanos with mexico and Iceland

To get back to the Colden oldies.

[PeterMP]

http://www.longrangeweather.com/global_temperatures.htm

I've addressed your graph before. If you want to try looking at another source something with real peer reviewed references. You can try here:

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/pubs/ipcc2007/fig614.png

There they actually show what the solar and volcanic forcings are vs. all other forcings (i.e. changes in temperature not explained by solar and volcanic forcings).

You might find it interesting.

[Larry]

I've addressed your graph before. If you want to try looking at another source something with real peer reviewed references. You can try here:

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/pubs/ipcc2007/fig614.png

There they actually show what the solar and volcanic forcings are vs. all other forcings (i.e. changes in temperature not explained by solar and volcanic forcings).

You might find it interesting.

Actually, I was noticing that, if I'm reading his chart right, then his chart says that we've been experiencing the fastest rise in temperatures ever, for the last 300 years, despite being also a time of unprecedented volcanic activity.

[Thiebear]

PeterMP: In other debates I've used the 1million years ice charts.

This one is different showing temps getting cold next and then getting much warmer.

Why do you dislike this chart of the last 1000 years with a note that says July 2012 hottest july Evah!

And it is showing it will soon be warm enough for the Hebrews to migrate once again (see 1100 on the chart): South Dakota is a good spot at that point.

And Peter: Your chart shows the most baseline volcanic activity in the last 100years compared to the last 1000 years?