Re: OT:Thanksgiving

On 9 Dec, 22:03, spamb...@xxxxxxxxxx (Doug Miller) wrote:
In article <9njll35tdif5mp1g2jdveibpci6rb3t...@xxxxxxx>, SkippyPB <swieg....@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 16:55:57 GMT, spamb...@xxxxxxxxxx (Doug Miller)
wrote:

In article <rosil31gd1msue1vnit25tq7jmtk30n...@xxxxxxx>, Howard Brazee
<how...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 15:57:17 GMT, spamb...@xxxxxxxxxx (Doug Miller)
wrote:
Glacier melts for one

In some areas. In other places, some glaciers are growing.

The difference isn't even close.

In any event, it's irrelevant to the question of whether the very slight (0.6
degrees C since 1880) warming is a natural process, or the result of human
activity. The planet has, in the past, been much warmer than it is now.

And it has been a hell of lot colder too during the Ice Age. The
planet was warmer many thousands of years ago when it was still in its
formative stagees. The .6 C that you so proudly keep posting is
inaccurate.

The IPCC (Intergovermental Panel on Climate Change - a UN agency
tasked with studying these things) found that the global average air
temperature near the Earth's surface rose 0.74 ± 0.18 °C (1.33 ± 0.32
°F) during the last 100 years.

NASA says 0.6 -- but either way, it's very slight.

The panel also found that most of the
observed increase in globally averaged temperatures since the mid-20th
century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic
greenhouse gas concentrations".

What is their explanation of the fact that there was three times as much
increase *before* the middle of the 20th century, as there was after?

Natural phenomena such as solar
variation combined with volcanoes probably had a small warming effect
from pre-industrial times to 1950 and a small cooling effect from 1950
onward.

Fitting the data to the conclusion...


So how do you explain the observations? And, since the instruments
used were not as accurate as modern ones, what do you believe the real
variations have been over the last 100 years and what was the 'true'
level of CO2 one hundred years ago?
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OT:Thanksgiving
    ... The planet has, in the past, been much warmer than it is now. ... tasked with studying these things) found that the global average air ... variation combined with volcanoes probably had a small warming effect ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)
  • Re: Travoltas aid
    ... But concerns over their sudden demand on energy (and therefore about China's increasing impact on global pollution and warming) is, as far as I know, relatively recent. ... Yet it is the biggest energy consumer of the planet (because of it's way of life, because of mass-consumption), and that, in turn, has a major effect on global pollution. ...
    (soc.culture.french)
  • Re: One degree and were done for
    ... Warming is greatest in the high latitudes of the northern hemisphere, ... Earth is already as warm as at any time in the last 10,000 years, and is ... planet is indeed warming up. ... James Lovelock Says This Time We've Pushed the Earth Too Far ...
    (rec.org.mensa)
  • (OT) "Dimming Sun" on PBS...
    ... Now, while the air in the U.S. and Canada is cleaner, we've cleaned up all the particulate pollution, so more sun gets through and like we're warmer, and such. ... But, like, we haven't cleaned up the greenhouse gasses (everything not soot), so the more warmer sun gets stuck here and we're all going to die. ... by their own admission the planet was TWENTY FIVE DEGREES WARMER 50 billion years ago (hmm... ...
    (rec.sport.pro-wrestling)
  • Re: Atheists: Americas most distrusted minority
    ... an already warming planet, makes a good case for strong human influnce on ... climate and gives good play to the shortcomings in the case for global ... boilerplate global-warming orthodoxy. ...
    (rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated)