|
Post by theallan on Feb 2, 2007 17:22:15 GMT -5
And I still stand by my argument that a ONE DEGREE change in AVERAGE temperature is not significant of any massive climate trend. It's like being in the middle of spring, realizing that the average temperature yesterday was 3 degrees cooler than today, and saying, "If this trend continues, the city will be uninhabitable in a matter of weeks!" That's ridiculous, and so is looking at LESS THAN A CENTURY of data and deciding that they represent a trend of any kind. Other facts that the various environmental activists tend to leave out: 1) Increases in temperature can be attributed to variations in solar activity 2) The average temperature two or three hundred years ago was probably a LOT warmer than today. 3) Parts of the glaciers are REFREEZING while other parts are melting. Just thought I'd toss those out there
|
|
|
Post by Elphie_Enthusiast on Apr 10, 2007 16:20:40 GMT -5
And where is your proof-sites, books, ect. "For over the past 200 years, the burning of fossil fuels, such as coal and oil, and deforestation have caused the concentrations of heat-trapping "greenhouse gases" to increase significantly in our atmosphere. These gases prevent heat from escaping to space, somewhat like the glass panels of a greenhouse. Greenhouse gases are necessary to life as we know it, because they keep the planet's surface warmer than it otherwise would be. But, as the concentrations of these gases continue to increase in the atmosphere, the Earth's temperature is climbing above past levels. According to NOAA and NASA data, the Earth's average surface temperature has increased by about 1.2 to 1.4ºF since 1900. The warmest global average temperatures on record have all occurred within the past 15 years, with the warmest two years being 1998 and 2005. Most of the warming in recent decades is likely the result of human activities. Other aspects of the climate are also changing such as rainfall patterns, snow and ice cover, and sea level. If greenhouse gases continue to increase, climate models predict that the average temperature at the Earth's surface could increase from 2.5 to 10.4ºF above 1990 levels by the end of this century. Scientists are certain that human activities are changing the composition of the atmosphere, and that increasing the concentration of greenhouse gases will change the planet's climate. But they are not sure by how much it will change, at what rate it will change, or what the exact effects will be. See the Science and Health and Environmental Effects sections of this site for more detail." ~http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/basicinfo.html And if you really feel like reading it *Cough Allal Cough* Here is another cretable site (more cretable than my spelling) www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/globalwarming/what.htmland another. Read what you want. www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/globalwarming.htmlQuestions?
|
|
|
Post by {joy the hideous new girl} on Apr 10, 2007 20:52:30 GMT -5
XD Your typos will never cease to amuse me, my dear Randimuffins. ♥ *shrugs* I don't really have an argument in here. I think scientific debates are kind of unsuitable here, because the only people who ever read/understand them are Allan and occasionally Randi. XD I personally believe that global warming exists, but if sufficient proof was presented to me that it doesn't, I would be willing to accept it.
|
|
|
Post by theallan on Apr 18, 2007 18:19:03 GMT -5
And thus my point. What does this prove, statistically? In the '70s scientists were freaking out over an observed DECREASE in globalo climate! It's human tendency to believe that any observed phenomenon will continue as it has since last Saturday, but any observer of the weather can tell you that's not true. Looking through earth's history, one can find all sorts of climate changes, from ice ages to droughts and whatever else you like. Most of them occurred over periods of THOUSANDS of years, not a mere 107. On the grand scale of things, a 1.4 degree increase in temperature over 100 years amounts to a small pebble on the road of earth's environmental history.
The statement that all record temperatures have occurred in the past two years is flawed in two important ways:
1) RECORDED temperature history does not extend back very far, certainly not far back enough to make a statistically significant sample.
2) Whenever a record is broken, it is RECENT to whatever time in which it was broken. In other words, scientists recording temperatures when the last record was set could have blamed "global warming", but this would be just as flawed as claiming that the recent record-breaking weightlifter signifies a strengthening trend in American citizens.
To use legal terms: would you say this constitutes "reasonable doubt"?
|
|