Yuku free message boards

Quote:

---

Riverc0il
My understanding on this particular aspect of the issue is that current warming is significantly faster than previous natural trends. Past natural trends of warming and cooling have been strongly correlated with the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere.

---

You might be right about this like I stated before my knowledge on the subject is limited.

That being said I have researched this subject in depth today and found some interesting information.

The sun has been in an increased heating cycle over this same period, something like 0.014 degrees increase per year for the last 10 years (at least).

The simultaneous melting of both the Martian and Earth's icecaps seems oddly coincidental and we know that humans are not polluting the Martian atmosphere. In addition the warm up of the Martian atmosphere has also been very rapid.

A look back through history shows that during times of sunspot activity (happening now) the earth warms and when this activity stops (expected by the year 2100) ice ages begin.

And while the average temp of earth has increased by 1 degree some regions have remained the same and some others have even cooled, I'm no expert but if this were atmosphere related wouldn't the warm up be more evenly distributed?

Quote:

---

Riverc0il
We know pretty well how much CO2 humans are putting into the air on an annual basis.

---

This is true and I would expect that this is having some effect, but from everything I am reading it seems to be over exaggerated by people who forgot to take into account the most basic element of the Earth's warmth our sun.

And again it does nothing to answer the simultaneous Mars warming question.

Quote:

---

Riverc0il
I would like to see any scientist that supports a natural warming theory explain how man made CO2 is not a huge part of the equation, if not the main aspect of the equation, and further what is causing the warming if not the CO2 level increase as has been noted in the past.

---

Here is an excerpt from an article that I found that helps explain some of this conflicting data and while I doubt that you or I will find any (reputable) scientist that will discount the c02 factor completely, many it seems are now beginning to question the true level of its effect in light of new data.

Quote:

---

Theodor Landscheidt at Nova Scotia's Schroeter Institute for Research in Cycles of Solar Activity, has shown quite conclusively that the sun waxes and wanes on quite predictable 11-year cycles, which can be moderated or intensified by longer-range, but more irregular cycles. Landscheidt, as a result, is unpopular with the UN scientists in charge of pushing the manmade global warming theory. In 1995, they wrote that the sun's effect on climate in the 20th century "has been considerably smaller than the anthropogenic (manmade effect)." But Landscheidt has demonstrated that "a change of 0.1 per cent (in solar energy) effective during a very long interval can release a real ice age."

For some reason, despite all this research, most climate scientists have clung to the "solar constant," the notion that the sun more or less shone steadily and that its variations had little impact on climate change.

Now, that may be about to change. Gerard Bond of the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University, along with nine other experts on oceans, environmental physics, tree-ring formation and glaciation from around the world, have examined the rates of deposit of tiny particles from melting icebergs in the North Atlantic.

And what have they found? Why, lo and behold, during periods of increased sun strength, the oceans have warmed and the bergs have melted more rapidly. The correlation is so strong, that one scientist who formerly blamed man's industrial activity for global warming told Science magazine, the solar theory "is now the leading hypothesis."

Blaming the industrialized world for global warming, and urging international regulation of industry is misguided. It's putting the ideological horse before the scientific cart.

---

Here is another quote.

Quote:

---

"Changes in the Sun can account for major climate changes on Earth for the past 300 years, including part of the recent surge of global warming," claims Sallie Baliunas, an astronomer at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics (CfA).

---

Quote:

---

Riverc0il
Obviously, correlation is not causation, but a legitimate alternative theory that is supported by Occam's Razor needs to be presented to put current scientific findings in doubt. I fully support scientifically testing the current warming theories to ensure they are accurate or looking for other theories, but I have yet to see much credible support that would suggest man's contribution is not the significant cause. Could be some kind of solar issue, but the rate at which things are changing would suggest differently.

---

Again you might be correct, but my reading is making me wonder if this whole thing has been over exaggerated and rushed towards a faulty conclusion.

Quote:

---

Riverc0il
I have not seen much variance on the issue though certain scientists definitely seem to focus on aspects involving their specialties.

---

Maybe because I do a lot of surfing when I research a topic but I have heard everything from smokers and cars emitting a heavy dose of carbon monoxide into the air to solar flares.

Finally I should add that I am learning about this subject as I go but I am not going to restrict my reading to the current propaganda. I will be reviewing all the reputable ideas that I can find and will be looking for answers that involve all of the elements, including the shifting temperature of our sun, our planet and the seemingly simultaneous warming of other planets in our system.

Later

I would like to make one thing clear here, even if it turns out that the current global warming trend is mostly due to our Sun's higher than normal output, I do not approve of relaxing our efforts. We should continue to clean up our act so that it does not become a huge problem later on down the road.

On the other hand I do not like it when people of authority attempt to motivate me by using scare tactics and the more I read the more it looks like that is the case here.

But I am still acquiring data

Later

Quote:

---

Riverc0il
You didn't reference your quotes in the first reply but I did notice Fox News as a reference within your second reply.

---

Yea, in that first part I read the info the day before and could not find the article again.

Quote:

---

Riverc0il
Best to stick with scientific journals and direct quotes on these issues rather than media with an agenda (I don't like any media with an agenda, left or right, for that matter).

---

I was more interested in the scientist's names and fields of study offered in the piece, just in case someone might have been interested in checking them out. But you are correct; generally the media is not a good first choice as a source.

Quote:

---

Riverc0il
As you mentioned, even if man's influence is not the primary impact, it is certainly a strong cause without question even if not the main cause if research proves that point. Another fact to consider would be that while the random heat fluxuations from the sun can go up or down over time, currently the man made CO2 emissions are only increasing every year. So even if it turns out to be a temporary warming phase due to some aspects outside our control, we still have very long term implications that perhaps man may not be the only cause of warming currently but there certainly are dire future implications based on the road we are traveling.

---

Exactly, my thinking is we might have lucked out and caught this problem early enough to make some real positive corrections, but I am not counting on it either.

And there is a real possibility of the authorities using this information to excuse their lack of action.

Quote:

---

Riverc0il
Personally? I am budgeting my finances so that our household is financially self sufficient within 20 years including owning a home without mortgage and owning two high MPG vehicles without lean. Enough acres to have a nice garden for a worst case scenario. While I do not believe that the global warming issue alone will cause an economic crisis, I think there are so many factors coming together down that road that we are in for some trouble well before I hit retirement age. Doesn't hurt to take some steps in advanced just in case based on an economic equivalent of Pascal's Wager.

---

I have no debt, one vehicle (its paid for) and working towards buying some property. So we are not all that different in that regard.

Later