Global Warming


Moderators: Freakzilla, ᴶᵛᵀᴬ, Omphalos

Post Reply
User avatar
GamePlayer
70mm God
Posts: 2993
Joined: 09 Feb 2008 11:26
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Post by GamePlayer »

We should be exploring alternatives vigorously, but I think lifestyle changes would prove far more effective in the short term (read: 10-20 years) than any ridiculously radical the-sky-is-falling initiatives.

For example, if one really wants to reduce waste and eliminate emissions, people should be embracing the age of digital distribution. No more CDs, DVDs and Blu-Ray discs. Everything should be shifted to a physical-less medium in which distribution becomes data transfer and nothing else. No more wasteful manufacturing for short term popular culture products. Further, people should be embracing automobile solutions like Auto-Share and Zip rather than owning their own vehicles. This not only reduces the amount of automobiles on the road, it also reduces the extent to which people use their vehicles. Instead of driving absolutely everywhere, people will walk three blocks to the store. This also has the ancillary benefit of improving public health.

By and large, simple solutions like these can have huge favorable impacts on the environment in very short order.
"They can chew you up, but they gotta spit you out."
User avatar
Freakzilla
Lead Singer and Driver of the Winnebego
Posts: 18449
Joined: 05 Feb 2008 01:27
Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Contact:

Post by Freakzilla »

There isn't a store, not even a gas station, within three MILES of my house, much less three blocks.

Those kind of plans sound great but they don't work for everyone.
Image
Paul of Dune was so bad it gave me a seizure that dislocated both of my shoulders and prolapsed my anus.
~Pink Snowman
User avatar
GamePlayer
70mm God
Posts: 2993
Joined: 09 Feb 2008 11:26
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Post by GamePlayer »

No, just the majority.
"They can chew you up, but they gotta spit you out."
User avatar
A Thing of Eternity
Posts: 6090
Joined: 08 Apr 2008 15:35
Location: Calgary Alberta

Post by A Thing of Eternity »

GamePlayer wrote:No, just the majority.
Word.

I'm eyeballing the zip carsd right now, thinking of getting rid of my car.
Image
User avatar
Freakzilla
Lead Singer and Driver of the Winnebego
Posts: 18449
Joined: 05 Feb 2008 01:27
Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Contact:

Post by Freakzilla »

You're saying the majority of the world population lives in a metropolitan area where mass transit would be practical?

Sorry, that's complete bullshit.

The 28-county Atlanta Metropolitan Area is the 8th largest region in the United States, with more than 5,376,285 residents.

That's in an area of 8,376 sq. mi. or 21,694 km².

The train system we have, MARTA (Move Africans Rapidly Through Atlanta), is in the news now saying it can't afford to keep running 7 days a week. And things are only going to get worse with Obama's mad spending spree.

Apart from that, the train has RUINED parts of town that used to be beautifull. Not only does public transportation enable people to commute to work, it inables criminals to commute to the suburbs.

How do I carry groceries for six on a train?
Image
Paul of Dune was so bad it gave me a seizure that dislocated both of my shoulders and prolapsed my anus.
~Pink Snowman
User avatar
A Thing of Eternity
Posts: 6090
Joined: 08 Apr 2008 15:35
Location: Calgary Alberta

Post by A Thing of Eternity »

Freakzilla wrote:
Not only does public transportation enable people to commute to work, it inables criminals to commute to the suburbs.
Oh for fucks sakes, you had an intelligent post/arguement until that line. :lol:

Also... the majority of the western nations do live in cities. Not quite sure where you're coming from on that one.
Image
User avatar
Redstar
Posts: 1202
Joined: 25 Feb 2009 04:13

Post by Redstar »

A Thing of Eternity wrote:
Freakzilla wrote:
Not only does public transportation enable people to commute to work, it inables criminals to commute to the suburbs.
Oh for fucks sakes, you had an intelligent post/arguement until that line. :lol:

Also... the majority of the western nations do live in cities. Not quite sure where you're coming from on that one.
Perhaps he meant prevents?
User avatar
Freakzilla
Lead Singer and Driver of the Winnebego
Posts: 18449
Joined: 05 Feb 2008 01:27
Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Contact:

Post by Freakzilla »

I think he's making fun of my spelling.

I meant enables
Image
Paul of Dune was so bad it gave me a seizure that dislocated both of my shoulders and prolapsed my anus.
~Pink Snowman
User avatar
Redstar
Posts: 1202
Joined: 25 Feb 2009 04:13

Post by Redstar »

I thought so, but you spelled it right the first time... Seemed you were being very subtle.
User avatar
SandChigger
KJASF Ground Zero
Posts: 14492
Joined: 08 Feb 2008 22:29
Location: A continuing state of irritation
Contact:

Post by SandChigger »

Again, FUCK the Earth. BURN BABY BURN!!! :twisted:

:shock:

Oh, sorry, I thought this was the thread for stupid posts about the environment. :roll:
User avatar
A Thing of Eternity
Posts: 6090
Joined: 08 Apr 2008 15:35
Location: Calgary Alberta

Post by A Thing of Eternity »

Freakzilla wrote:I think he's making fun of my spelling.

I meant enables
No, I was saying that is the most rediculous argument against public transit I have ever heard in my life. We should get rid of roads too, which also enable criminals to move about, and food, which enables them to continued living. :wink:
Image
User avatar
Freakzilla
Lead Singer and Driver of the Winnebego
Posts: 18449
Joined: 05 Feb 2008 01:27
Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Contact:

Post by Freakzilla »

A Thing of Eternity wrote:
Freakzilla wrote:
Not only does public transportation enable people to commute to work, it inables criminals to commute to the suburbs.
Oh for fucks sakes, you had an intelligent post/arguement until that line. :lol:

Also... the majority of the western nations do live in cities. Not quite sure where you're coming from on that one.
I live in a city, everyone I know lives in a city. But these cities are not all like Atlanta, the ROADS don't even make sense. The cities are like islands with pretty much nothing but wilderness between.
Local roads
There are many historic roads across the area, named after its mills and early ferries, and the bridges later built to replace the ferries. Pace's Ferry is perhaps the best known.

Owing to the area's long history of settlement (unlike the Las Vegas metropolitan area, for example) and uneven terrain, most arterial roads are not straight, and instead curve around. This can be confusing for visitors, much more so than the famed proliferation of Atlanta city streets with "Peachtree" in the name.

The region maintains the nomenclature of each county naming its roads for the towns they connect with in surrounding counties. Thus, from Dallas to Roswell, Georgia 120 is Marietta Highway to the Paulding/Cobb county line, Dallas Highway to the city of Marietta, Whitlock Avenue to the town square, South Park Square for just one city block, Roswell Street to Cobb Parkway (at the Big Chicken), Roswell Road to the Cobb/Fulton county line, and finally Marietta Street to the town square in Roswell.

There are many roads like this throughout the area, leading to duplication of names in different counties. In Fulton, "Roswell Road" refers to Georgia 9 through northern Atlanta and across Sandy Springs, in addition to the above-mentioned use in Cobb, for example. Numeric street addressing is done by county as well, with the origin usually being at one corner of the town square in the county seat. The U.S. Postal Service ignores these actual and logical boundaries however, overlapping ZIP codes and their associated place names across counties. The Cumberland/Galleria area has Cobb's numbers and an "SE" suffix, but is called "Atlanta" by the USPS, which can confuse visitors to think it is far away in southeast Atlanta.

Where more than one town in the same county has a road to the same place, the smaller towns have their own name prefixed to it, while the county seat does not. The road need not go directly to the other place, but may connect through other roads. Examples include Due West Road west from Marietta, Kennesaw Due West Road southwest from Kennesaw, and Acworth Due West Road south from Acworth. Some are usually hyphenated, like Peachtree-Dunwoody Road, Ashford-Dunwoody Road, Chamblee-Dunwoody Road, and Chamblee-Tucker Road.

There are also several roads named for communities which have been overwhelmed by the urban and suburban sprawl, and so are usually not recognized by newcomers. These include Sandy Plains, Crabapple, Toonigh, Ashford, and Due West. Some of these communities are in the middle of the road, while some are at or very near one end. Some places get renamed, either over time (Sandy Plains gradually became "Sprayberry" when Sprayberry High School moved there and similarly-named shopping centers popped up around it), by the USPS (Toonigh is identified as "Lebanon"), or by new suburbanites who don't think the existing name is good enough (Hog Mountain is now "Hamilton Mill"). In this case, the roads usually maintain their names even if the places do not.

Several of these roads have become arterials, while others remain pleasant two-lane drives. Many are state roads as well, though GDOT has the habit of moving numbered routes onto other roads, sometimes arbitrarily, and occasionally sending them through an entirely different town. State highway numbers also tend to curve around arbitrarily while their directional signs do not, rendering them useless where they indicate "north" and "south" in places the road goes east and west. There are also a few U.S. highways that cross the area, including 19, 23, 29, 41, and 78.

Other arterials are completely new, like much of Barrett Parkway and South Fulton Parkway, both constructed by their counties but partly covered with a state route number. Occasionally, roads are realigned or extended to meet each other directly at a cross-road, leading to odd curves and name changes.
If the mass transit had been in place BEFORE the urban sprawl took place, I'd say it might be practical. But a lot of citizens, like me, have chosen where they live for several factors. Schools and home costs were the main factors for me, I bought the most house I could in the best school district I could afford to live in. My work commute was secondary to that. Now I've switched jobs since then and my commute is even further. I have to go across Atlanta to get to work. This is not much of a factor since I have my own transportation.

Even if they built a public system , I would probably have to transfer several times to get to my office because half of my commute is against the traffic flow. I can imagine it taking like three hours just to get to work. I'm not counting the cab from my house to a buss line, then the buss and whatever transfers they require to get to the train station. If the system was already there, I could have accounted for that when choosing where to buy a house.

I used to take a van pool directly to my office and I had to get up two hours early just for that. Fuck working late, that was not an option. I wouldn't last two weeks at Honeywell if I couldn't work late.

I have lived in Germany, I know what good public transportation is like and I'm telling you that will not work here in the short term. Maybe in DECADES when people and bussinesses can adjust to where the system is, it will help.
Mass transit
Although Atlanta has always been a railroad town, and the city once had an extensive streetcar system as far out as Marietta (about 15 miles (24 km) or 25km northwest), modern rapid transit has been an exceedingly difficult and drawn-out process, putting the metro area well-behind comparable cities.

MARTA operates rapid transit in Fulton and Dekalb counties, while Gwinnett, Cobb, and Clayton counties operate their own buses with no current rail transit. This is a result of those counties refusal to join the MARTA system, a situation which was originally closely related to white flight from the city. It is the only U.S. system in which the state does not provide any funds for operation or expansion, instead relying entirely on a 1% sales tax.

Plans are underway for commuter rail and bus rapid transit (BRT), though these are some years away. The first commuter rail line would run south of the city, eventually extended to Lovejoy and possibly Hampton near Atlanta Motor Speedway. This project took two decades under Democrats, and has now been threatened by some Republicans in the Georgia General Assembly as being "wasteful", despite being successful in every other U.S. city that has it. The "Brain Train" would likely be the second route, connecting the University of Georgia in Athens to Emory University and Georgia Tech in Atlanta.

As planned, all commuter trains would arrive at the Atlanta Multimodal Passenger Terminal, the long-delayed facility just across Peachtree Street from the Five Points MARTA station, where all of its lines meet. The planning for the system, and its extension as intercity rail across the state, is the responsibility of the Georgia Rail Passenger Authority.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlanta_metro
Image
Paul of Dune was so bad it gave me a seizure that dislocated both of my shoulders and prolapsed my anus.
~Pink Snowman
User avatar
Freakzilla
Lead Singer and Driver of the Winnebego
Posts: 18449
Joined: 05 Feb 2008 01:27
Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Contact:

Post by Freakzilla »

A Thing of Eternity wrote:
Freakzilla wrote:I think he's making fun of my spelling.

I meant enables
No, I was saying that is the most rediculous argument against public transit I have ever heard in my life. We should get rid of roads too, which also enable criminals to move about, and food, which enables them to continued living. :wink:
Hyperbole.

I can show you examples in my metro area of communities that were absolutely run into the ground with the introduction of the rail lines.

I live where I do partly because I don't want my kids anywhere near the people that live in downtown Atlanta. You think I should appreciate a train that would bring them to my doorstep?
Image
Paul of Dune was so bad it gave me a seizure that dislocated both of my shoulders and prolapsed my anus.
~Pink Snowman
User avatar
A Thing of Eternity
Posts: 6090
Joined: 08 Apr 2008 15:35
Location: Calgary Alberta

Post by A Thing of Eternity »

Freakzilla wrote:
A Thing of Eternity wrote:
Freakzilla wrote:I think he's making fun of my spelling.

I meant enables
No, I was saying that is the most rediculous argument against public transit I have ever heard in my life. We should get rid of roads too, which also enable criminals to move about, and food, which enables them to continued living. :wink:
Hyperbole.

I can show you examples in my metro area of communities that were absolutely run into the ground with the introduction of the rail lines.

I live where I do partly because I don't want my kids anywhere near the people that live in downtown Atlanta. You think I should appreciate a train that would bring them to my doorstep?
I don't think that's a good enough reason to get rid of the train no, but it it's also going under then by all means, shut er down. I understand why that would piss you off though.

I don't bother anyone for not using transit, I have a car myself, but I'm not going to deny that mass public transit is the way things need to go for our health and welfare. I'm not looking forward to moving to Calgary and it's junk transit after having had Vancouver's fantastic skytrain and bus system to use (I use them at least 3 times a week, even with a car).
Image
User avatar
GamePlayer
70mm God
Posts: 2993
Joined: 09 Feb 2008 11:26
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Post by GamePlayer »

Freakzilla wrote:You're saying the majority of the world population lives in a metropolitan area where mass transit would be practical?

Sorry, that's complete bullshit.
No, that's what you're saying, and yes, it is complete bullshit.

Roughly 79% of the population of my country is urbanized and over half live in the four major urban centers of the country. If even a small percentage of those people moved to a vehicle sharing system, the resulting trickle down reduction would make legislation like Koyoto look even more useless than it already is.

Knee-jerk reactions aside, the idea isn't a rights issue. The salient point is not to take automobiles from the "cold dead hands" of our citizens, but to sell that portion of the population on the idea that they really don't have a lifestyle conducive to the excessive use of a vehicle. Now, I've no idea what the statistics are on the number of people in major cities that would gain from an auto sharing system, but I'd be willing to bet it's at least half. My friend just sold his car and went with Zip; he's never been happier.

If more people just honestly considered the practical, non-green options that are available, none of these eco-nazi demands would be necessary. Waste, carbon emissions and all the other bullshit would be drastically reduced without the trend to paint our industrial sectors as evil corporate villains.
"They can chew you up, but they gotta spit you out."
User avatar
SandChigger
KJASF Ground Zero
Posts: 14492
Joined: 08 Feb 2008 22:29
Location: A continuing state of irritation
Contact:

Post by SandChigger »

Your first mistake is trying to discuss this rationally.... ;)
User avatar
Freakzilla
Lead Singer and Driver of the Winnebego
Posts: 18449
Joined: 05 Feb 2008 01:27
Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Contact:

Post by Freakzilla »

If I was single or even married without children I'm sure I'd be much more enthusiastic about mass transit. Moving to where it's accessible wouldn'e be such a big deal.

But for a mass transit system to replace everyone's cars in the Atlanta Metro area it would be enourmous in scale and cost. I'm not against it, it just doesn't seem possible, or even affordible if it was.
Image
Paul of Dune was so bad it gave me a seizure that dislocated both of my shoulders and prolapsed my anus.
~Pink Snowman
User avatar
Rakis
Posts: 1583
Joined: 16 Feb 2008 00:00

Post by Rakis »

Freakzilla wrote:If I was single or even married without children I'm sure I'd be much more enthusiastic about mass transit. Moving to where it's accessible wouldn'e be such a big deal.

But for a mass transit system to replace everyone's cars in the Atlanta Metro area it would be enourmous in scale and cost. I'm not against it, it just doesn't seem possible, or even affordible if it was.
I agree. Mass transit is for singles or couples, not families...I can't even go to work alone without the van, cause i need it for work...

Can you imagine the spider-web of train tracks to supply transport for anyone? :shock:

And i don't believe in buses either as the solution: You would not get anywhere in time...ever...
User avatar
A Thing of Eternity
Posts: 6090
Joined: 08 Apr 2008 15:35
Location: Calgary Alberta

Post by A Thing of Eternity »

Zip cars would work for everyone in the city though, including families, except those in an extreme rush, plus difference sizes for different needs.

Nothing is ever going to work for everyone, that's not really the point though, it's just getting it to work for most people, and until that time, as many as possible.
Image
User avatar
Freakzilla
Lead Singer and Driver of the Winnebego
Posts: 18449
Joined: 05 Feb 2008 01:27
Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Contact:

Global Cooling is Here!

Post by Freakzilla »

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php? ... &aid=10783" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Global Research Editor's note

The following article represents an alternative view and analysis of global climate change, which challenges the dominant Global Warming Consensus.

Global Research does not necessarily endorse the proposition of "Global Cooling", nor does it accept at face value the Consensus on Global Warming. Our purpose is to encourage a more balanced debate on the topic of global climate change.

INTRODUCTION

Despite no global warming in 10 years and recording setting cold in 2007-2008, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climatic Change (IPCC) and computer modelers who believe that CO2 is the cause of global warming still predict the Earth is in store for catastrophic warming in this century. IPCC computer models have predicted global warming of 1° F per decade and 5-6° C (10-11° F) by 2100 (Fig. 1), which would cause global catastrophe with ramifications for human life, natural habitat, energy and water resources, and food production. All of this is predicated on the assumption that global warming is caused by increasing atmospheric CO2 and that CO2 will continue to rise rapidly.

However, records of past climate changes suggest an altogether different scenario for the 21st century. Rather than drastic global warming at a rate of 0.5 ° C (1° F) per decade, historic records of past natural cycles suggest global cooling for the first several decades of the 21st century to about 2030, followed by global warming from about 2030 to about 2060, and renewed global cooling from 2060 to 2090 (Easterbrook, D.J., 2005, 2006a, b, 2007, 2008a, b); Easterbrook and Kovanen, 2000, 2001). Climatic fluctuations over the past several hundred years suggest ~30 year climatic cycles of global warming and cooling, on a general rising trend from the Little Ice Age.

PREDICTIONS BASED ON PAST CLIMATE PATTERNS

Global climate changes have been far more intense (12 to 20 times as intense in some cases) than the global warming of the past century, and they took place in as little as 20–100 years. Global warming of the past century (0.8° C) is virtually insignificant when compared to the magnitude of at least 10 global climate changes in the past 15,000 years. None of these sudden global climate changes could possibly have been caused by human CO2 input to the atmosphere because they all took place long before anthropogenic CO2 emissions began. The cause of the ten earlier ‘natural’ climate changes was most likely the same as the cause of global warming from 1977 to 1998.

Relationships between glacial fluctuations, the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, and global climate change.

After several decades of studying alpine glacier fluctuations in the North Cascade Range, my research showed a distinct pattern of glacial advances and retreats (the Glacial Decadal Oscillation, GDO) that correlated well with climate records. In 1992, Mantua published the Pacific Decadal Oscillation curve showing warming and cooling of the Pacific Ocean that correlated remarkably well with glacial fluctuations. Both the GDA and the PDO matched global temperature records and were obviously related (Fig. 4). All but the latest 30 years of changes occurred prior to significant CO2 emissions so they were clearly unrelated to atmospheric CO2.

The significance of the correlation between the GDO, PDO, and global temperature is that once this connection has been made, climatic changes during the past century can be understood, and the pattern of glacial and climatic fluctuations over the past millennia can be reconstructed. These patterns can then be used to project climatic changes in the future. Using the pattern established for the past several hundred years, in 1998 I projected the temperature curve for the past century into the next century and came up with curve ‘A’ in Figure 5 as an approximation of what might be in store for the world if the pattern of past climate changes continued. Ironically, that prediction was made in the warmest year of the past three decades and at the acme of the 1977-1998 warm period. At that time, the projected curved indicated global cooling beginning about 2005 ± 3-5 years until about 2030, then renewed warming from about 2030 to about 2060 (unrelated to CO2—just continuation of the natural cycle), then another cool period from about 2060 to about 2090. This was admittedly an approximation, but it was radically different from the 1° F per decade warming called for by the IPCC. Because the prediction was so different from the IPCC prediction, time would obviously show which projection was ultimately correct.

Now a decade later, the global climate has not warmed 1° F as forecast by the IPCC but has cooled slightly until 2007-08 when global temperatures turned sharply downward. In 2008, NASA satellite imagery (Figure 6) confirmed that the Pacific Ocean had switched from the warm mode it had been in since 1977 to its cool mode, similar to that of the 1945-1977 global cooling period. The shift strongly suggests that the next several decades will be cooler, not warmer as predicted by the IPCC.

Implications of PDO, NAO, GDO, and sun spot cycles for global climate in coming decades

The IPCC prediction of global temperatures, 1° F warmer by 2011 and 2° F by 2038 (Fig. 1), stand little chance of being correct. NASA’s imagery showing that the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) has shifted to its cool phase is right on schedule as predicted by past climate and PDO changes (Easterbrook, 2001, 2006, 2007). The PDO typically lasts 25-30 years and assures North America of cool, wetter climates during its cool phases and warmer, drier climates during its warm phases. The establishment of the cool PDO, together with similar cooling of the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO), virtually assures several decades of global cooling and the end of the past 30-year warm phase. It also means that the IPCC predictions of catastrophic global warming this century were highly inaccurate.

The switch of PDO cool mode to warm mode in 1977 initiated several decades of global warming. The PDO has now switched from its warm mode (where it had been since 1977) into its cool mode. As shown on the graph above, each time this had happened in the past century, global temperature has followed. The upper map shows cool ocean temperatures in blue (note the North American west coast). The lower diagram shows how the PDO has switched back and forth from warm to cool modes in the past century, each time causing global temperature to follow. Comparisons of historic global climate warming and cooling over the past century with PDO and NAO oscillations, glacial fluctuations, and sun spot activity show strong correlations and provide a solid data base for future climate change projections.

The Pacific Ocean has a warm temperature mode and a cool temperature mode, and in the past century, has switched back forth between these two modes every 25-30 years (known as the Pacific Decadal Oscillation or PDO). In 1977 the Pacific abruptly shifted from its cool mode (where it had been since about 1945) into its warm mode, and this initiated global warming from 1977 to 1998. The correlation between the PDO and global climate is well established. The announcement by NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory that the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) had shifted to its cool phase is right on schedule as predicted by past climate and PDO changes (Easterbrook, 2001, 2006, 2007). The PDO typically lasts 25-30 years and assures North America of cool, wetter climates during its cool phases and warmer, drier climates during its warm phases. The establishment of the cool PDO, together with similar cooling of the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO), virtually assures several decades of global cooling and the end of the past 30-year warm phase.

Comparisons of historic global climate warming and cooling over the past century with PDO and NAO oscillations, glacial fluctuations, and sun spot activity show strong correlations and provide a solid data base for future climate change projections. As shown by the historic pattern of GDOs and PDOs over the past century and by corresponding global warming and cooling, the pattern is part of ongoing warm/cool cycles that last 25-30 years. The global cooling phase from 1880 to 1910, characterized by advance of glaciers worldwide, was followed by a shift to the warm-phase PDO for 30 years, global warming and rapid glacier recession. The cool-phase PDO returned in ~1945 accompanied by global cooling and glacial advance for 30 years. Shift to the warm-phase PDO in 1977 initiated global warming and recession of glaciers that persisted until 1998. Recent establishment of the PDO cool phase appeared right on target and assuming that its effect will be similar to past history, global climates can be expected to cool over the next 25-30 years. The global warming of this century is exactly in phase with the normal climatic pattern of cyclic warming and cooling and we have now switched from a warm phase to a cool phase right at the predicted time (Fig. 5)

The ramifications of the global cooling cycle for the next 30 years are far reaching―e.g., failure of crops in critical agricultural areas (it’s already happening this year), increasing energy demands, transportation difficulties, and habitat change. All this during which global population will increase from six billion to about nine billion. The real danger in spending trillions of dollars trying to reduce atmospheric CO2 is that little will be left to deal with the very real problems engendered by global cooling.

CONCLUSIONS

Global warming (i.e, the warming since 1977) is over. The minute increase of anthropogenic CO2 in the atmosphere (0.008%) was not the cause of the warming—it was a continuation of natural cycles that occurred over the past 500 years.

The PDO cool mode has replaced the warm mode in the Pacific Ocean, virtually assuring us of about 30 years of global cooling, perhaps much deeper than the global cooling from about 1945 to 1977. Just how much cooler the global climate will be during this cool cycle is uncertain. Recent solar changes suggest that it could be fairly severe, perhaps more like the 1880 to 1915 cool cycle than the more moderate 1945-1977 cool cycle. A more drastic cooling, similar to that during the Dalton and Maunder minimums, could plunge the Earth into another Little Ice Age, but only time will tell if that is likely.



Don J. Easterbrook is Professor Emeritus of Geology at Western Washington University. Bellingham, WA. He has published extensively on issues pertaining to global climate change. For further details see his list of publications
Image
Paul of Dune was so bad it gave me a seizure that dislocated both of my shoulders and prolapsed my anus.
~Pink Snowman
User avatar
SandChigger
KJASF Ground Zero
Posts: 14492
Joined: 08 Feb 2008 22:29
Location: A continuing state of irritation
Contact:

Re: Global Warming

Post by SandChigger »

So?
User avatar
Freakzilla
Lead Singer and Driver of the Winnebego
Posts: 18449
Joined: 05 Feb 2008 01:27
Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Contact:

Re: Global Warming

Post by Freakzilla »

SandChigger wrote:So?
So what?

So, I am not buying into the fear the tree huggers are selling.

So, I hope people can get a more balanced view desite the fear the tree huggers are selling.
Image
Paul of Dune was so bad it gave me a seizure that dislocated both of my shoulders and prolapsed my anus.
~Pink Snowman
User avatar
SadisticCynic
Posts: 2053
Joined: 07 Apr 2009 09:28
Location: In Time or in Space?

Re: Global Warming

Post by SadisticCynic »

Fascinating.

The cycle reminds me of this :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaia_hypothesis
Ah English, the language where pretty much any word can have any meaning! - A Thing of Eternity
User avatar
A Thing of Eternity
Posts: 6090
Joined: 08 Apr 2008 15:35
Location: Calgary Alberta

Re: Global Warming

Post by A Thing of Eternity »

I almost wish the left would shut up about global warming just so rightwingers wouldn't be able to use some doubt in GW as an excuse for abandoning responsability. The fact still remains we need to clean up our act or poison ourselves and everything else on this planet. The poisons and general polution might do more damage than global warming in the long run anyways. There are still FAR more RELIABLE scientists supporting the claim that we are causing the bulk of this change than there are against it - but they could of course be wrong. Lots of things could be true, maybe 911 really was bank rolled by the US, who knows. Whatever, who gives a shit, shut up about it already, let the scientists do what they do and clean up your act for one of the other 800 fucking thousand reasons we need to clean up our act.

My point remains that there are even more important reasons to clean up our acts, and this BS seems to make some people think that just because there MIGHT be a hole in the evidence for ONE part of the problem it means we can pollute all we want, whilst our oceans head towards mass extinction and our children eat almost exclusivly food filled with and covered in poison.

endrant.
Image
User avatar
A Thing of Eternity
Posts: 6090
Joined: 08 Apr 2008 15:35
Location: Calgary Alberta

Re: Global Warming

Post by A Thing of Eternity »

Baraka Bryan wrote:I actually totally agree with AToE (except for the right vs left crap... conservatives care about the environment too :P )... my views, your views, and whatever the actual truth about GW and the causes of GW are irrelevant. the most important thing is that we're currently consuming resources at an unsustainable rate, and pumping out more pollution than we're cleaning up. These trends have to reverse - and soon - or we'll be dealing with much bigger problems than a 1 degree temperature increase over the next decade.
I agree, except for the left vs right non-crap :wink: , it IS typically the right that doesn't believe in global warming, and that opposes reform. I'm not saying it's all or even most conservatives that are anti-environmental reform, but pretty much everyone other than the right is much more vocal and committed about it.

Glad we agree though. I'd love to see your party do something about it, but won't be holding my breath (even YOU have to admit I'd suffocate on that one!)
Image
Post Reply