No Need to Panic About Global Warming

Ok..I think weve beat this subject to death now..Weve established that Co2 levels are rising rapidly and that mankind is most likely to blame..Aparently whats in dispute at 285Bound is how big a deal this is..




END OF SUBJECT


Mods lock the thread please

Vice Lord wrote: Ok..I think weve beat this subject to death now..Weve established that Co2 levels are rising rapidly and that mankind is most likely to blame..Aparently whats in dispute at 285Bound is how big a deal this is..




END OF SUBJECT


Mods lock the thread please

This isn't Pinecam stupid.

Vice Lord wrote: Ok..I think weve beat this subject to death now..Weve established that Co2 levels are rising rapidly and that mankind is most likely to blame..Aparently whats in dispute at 285Bound is how big a deal this is..




END OF SUBJECT


Mods lock the thread please

Oh, it's you.

Mary Scott wrote:

Vice Lord wrote: Ok..I think weve beat this subject to death now..Weve established that Co2 levels are rising rapidly and that mankind is most likely to blame..Aparently whats in dispute at 285Bound is how big a deal this is..




END OF SUBJECT


Mods lock the thread please

Oh, it's you.

Yes it's me...Is that you Mary?

Rockdoc Franz wrote: Does the rise in CO2 really look different from the charted peak 30,000+ years ago? No. In fact, please note that each cycle of CO2 increase has been associated with sharp increases followed by gradual declines. The current level is not even on par with the previous peak. So how does the current CO2 volume constitute a record level? Projected data has no correlation in reality and is based upon flawed physics in the AGW model. If you want to talk about measured data, then do so. Mixing data and projected trends is inappropriate.

I think you misread the second graph I posted of the CO2 levels over the last 400,000 years. The so-called "Keeling Curve" is not projected data but is directly measured data over the last 54 years. Based on just that measured data, we are at a level of 380 ppm compared to a previous high over the last 400,000 years of 300 ppm (ice core data). Yes, they added some projected data through 2017 showing it going even higher to 400 ppm, and if you look at the first graph you can see the trend is so consistent that the projection is very reasonable. But still, you can ignore the projection if you wish and still see we are at record highs in CO2 for the last 400,000 years at 380 vs 300 ppm using measured data.

So far as radioactive CO2 goes, the site I used seemed quite certain of it. But I'm suppose other sites may disagree. Perhaps I could research it some more at a later time.

No need to panic at all... a new report from the British Met Office (who only a couple of years ago was telling us how we were all going to die by 2025)...

The supposed ‘consensus’ on man-made global warming is facing an inconvenient challenge after the release of new temperature data showing the planet has not warmed for the past 15 years.

The figures suggest that we could even be heading for a mini ice age to rival the 70-year temperature drop that saw frost fairs held on the Thames in the 17th Century.
Based on readings from more than 30,000 measuring stations, the data was issued last week without fanfare by the Met Office and the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit. It confirms that the rising trend in world temperatures ended in 1997.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... z1ksAkQjBd

The SAME EAST ANGLIA CLIMATE RESEARCH UNIT that was claiming all their climate warming data was incontrovertible proof. I developed an essay two years ago showing how faulty their computer modeling was and how corrupt their databases were. And now, the same people who were crying "the end of the world" try to tact and change the direction of their indisputable proof. Anyone who has swallowed this crap hook, line and sinker... I feel sorry for you.

If you want some "light" reading... take a look at how the data was corrupted.

http://www.pinecam.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=106244

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote: No need to panic at all... a new report from the British Met Office (who only a couple of years ago was telling us how we were all going to die by 2025)...

The supposed ‘consensus’ on man-made global warming is facing an inconvenient challenge after the release of new temperature data showing the planet has not warmed for the past 15 years.

The figures suggest that we could even be heading for a mini ice age to rival the 70-year temperature drop that saw frost fairs held on the Thames in the 17th Century.
Based on readings from more than 30,000 measuring stations, the data was issued last week without fanfare by the Met Office and the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit. It confirms that the rising trend in world temperatures ended in 1997.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... z1ksAkQjBd

The SAME EAST ANGLIA CLIMATE RESEARCH UNIT that was claiming all their climate warming data was incontrovertible proof. I developed an essay two years ago showing how faulty their computer modeling was and how corrupt their databases were. And now, the same people who were crying "the end of the world" try to tact and change the direction of their indisputable proof. Anyone who has swallowed this crap hook, line and sinker... I feel sorry for you.

If you want some "light" reading... take a look at how the data was corrupted.

http://www.pinecam.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=106244

I alluded to this previouly in the thread.

There is a reason they are comparing the present to 1997. That's because 1997 was a record high year for the data they are using. In 2007 the same people were saying there was no warming for ten years so they could again use the 1997 data point. Now they are saying no warming in 15 years so they can use the record high 1997 data point.

If you use 1996 or 1998 instead as your starting point (or any most any other year other than 1997), you will see warmer temps in more recent years.

Picking and choosing a single data point like that is misleading to say the least. In addition they only look at a very short time period of 15 yrs and leave out the data for hundreds or thousands of years earlier. Each year during the last 15 yrs may not be a record high, but each year is close to a record high compared to earlier data that they are leaving out.

For the next four years they can no longer claim there is no warming in the last 15 years because they'd have to use a differnt year as the starting point. It just playing games with numbers. If they want an honest discussion about it, they should include data for at least the last 100 years.

There is more data which can be shown, but I don't have time to look for it right now...

I'm not convinced we have entered a cooling trend yet. The available data is like statistics, you can make it anything you want it to be. While the rise in temperature features sharp increases, the slope of the falling leg of the cycle is much less pronounced. It will take a longer period of time to establish unequivocal evidence that we have made the turn around. Obviously that reflects my preference for long term data.